Skip to main content

Full text of "English Review"

See other formats


" Viyella" "AZ A" "Clydella 

(RECD. TRADE MARK) ^^ j^^,.^^ ^ ^ ^fei (Tfado Oi.h'), 24-26. Newg»te Street, London. EC 1- 







Soldiers* Poetry (iv) Sub.-Lt. Charles L. Morgan, R.N.D. 

2nd-Lt. £. J. Doouss 

Capt. '' Leslie Hubert " 

Lt. Geoffrey Dearmer 

Sapper W. H. Pitcher 

Lt..Col. M. M. Haldane 

Wilfrid J. Jenkins (Telegraphist) 

Classic American Literature Gv) D. H. Lawrence 

The Pyramid of Power (ii) Major C. H. Douglas 

Two and Two Bart Kennedy 

The Garb of Peace H. Dennis Bradley 

The Two Lovers Gerald Cumberland 

The Impending Triumph of Labour 

Sir Leo Chiozza Money 
Persia and the Conference The Rt. hon. Ameer Ali 
The Problem of Russia Hamilton Fyfe 

Indemnities and Bolshevism Malcolm Lyon 

A New Order? Austin Harrison 



HALF-YEARLY „ 9/» the world. 

All rights retarved 


Incorporated A.D. 172a 



Full Prospectus on application to the Secretary. 

Head Ofnce - - ROYAL EXCHANGE. LONDON. E.G. 3 

Digitized by tine Internet Archive 

in 2008 witii funding from 

IVIicrosoft Corporation 



■ Viyella" "AZ A" "Clydella 





(RECD. THADE MARK) ^^ j^j,.^^ ^ ^^ Ltd. (Tfad* Ooly). 24-26, NewB«te Street. London. E.C I- 






Soldiers* Poetry (iv) Sub.-Lt. Charles L. Morgan, R.N.D. 

2nd-Lt. £. J. Doouss 

Capt. *' Leslie Hubert" 

Lt. Geoffrey Dearmer 

Sapper W. H. Pitcher 

Lt..Col. M. M. Haldane 

Wilfrid J. Jenkins (Telegraphist) 

Classie American Literature (iv) D. H. Lawrence 

The Pyramid of Power Gi) Major C. H. Douglas 

Two and Two Bart Kennedy 

The Garb of Peace H. Dennis Bradley 

The Two Lovers Gerald Cumberland 

The Impending Triumph of Labour 

Sir Leo Chiozza Money 

Persia and the Conference The Rt. hon. Ameer All 

I The Problem of Russia Hamilton Fyfe 

Jt^ Indemnities and Bolshevism Malcolm Lyon 

A New Order? Austin Harrison 


ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION: |8/» ^'^ "« '<> 


All rights roterved 



Incorporated A.D. 1720. 



F-uU Prospectus en appKcation to the Secretary. 

Head Ofnce - - ROYAL EXCHANGE, LONDON, E.C. 3 







The text, drawn from Oriental sources by SLIMAN-BEN-IBRAHIM, 
is adorned with 35 coloured plates and 12 ornamental pages, 
coloured and gilt, with decorative lettering, arabesques, etc. 

Limited edition of One Thousand Copies^ press-numbered: 

125 on Imperial Japanese vellum at £18 per copy 
875 on Hand-made paper at - - £8 „ 

This is not merely a "pretty" illustrated book, but a monument of Oriental ait. The 
^veat French painter, E. DINET, well known for his superb illustration of An ar,'' 
'^ Le Printemps des Cceurs," " Mirages," " Le Desert," etc., is not only responsible for 
the illustrations, but also for the text, which he has wrought out from Arabic sources in 
collaboration with his faithful friend in all his wanderings, SLIMAN-BEN-IBRAHIM. 

Never before has the life of the great Prophet of Islam (^the greatest in the eyes of many 
millions of intelligent men in the East) been set forth with sympathy, clearness and justice. 

For the first time, the life of Mohammad is illustrated by a thoroughly competent artist 
who has devoted his life to studying at original sources, like the gfi-eat Sir Richard 
R. F. Burton, the incomparable, ever-changing glory of Eastern life in camp and desert. 

After the many slanderous, vituperative lives of Mohammad that have appeared in 
European lands during the course of centuries, this book, divulging the real characteristics 
and triumphs of the mighty Prophet of Medinah, will come as a revelation to those who 
have no idea of the truth. 

This work is dedicated by the Author and his Arab collaborator to the memory of the 
\aliant Moslem soldiers, particularly those of France and England who, in the sacred 
cause of Right, Justice and Humanity have piously sacrificed their lives in the great wai 
of the Nations. 

AN ILLUSTRATED PROSPECTUS will be forwarded post-free on demand, at the 
nominal price of five shillings and sixpence, to intending buyers. 

This prospectus contains one of the full-page coloured illustrations by E. DINET ; an 
ornamental page from the book ; a specimen page of the text ; and terms of subscription ; 
the whole enclosed in an art wrapper. 

PARIS BOOK CLUB, 11, rue de Chateaudun, PARIsTlX^). 

The English Review Advertiser 



i i offers unique advantages over other lighting systems. An inspec- | | 

I i tion of plants already installed will convinoe the most sceptical. | I 


I I WriierorCataIoguetoSoleMakers;R.A.LiSTER&Co., LTa,Dpt.B,I6, Dursley.Glos.£j<4. /567 | I 


^^^^ ^^^ ^^rXJJ^ ^^^j pyj^pij^Q PLANT 

i i 




^ AKD STOPS , ^ 

^■^'itS^yy^i^yfiititiS'lliiiXlffffiiii^ ^g«*«*^ 

London Office, 
Where Plants can 
be seen at work, 

^^^^"^ 47: Victoria Street, 
gS*^***^ Westminster, 

S.W. I, 

hCT ''^Tjr^ " 'UtWyii.'^ .y, "Jb^ 


ttl - 


Ra^-- 1 





rT , 





>^' ,^ 





■ ,^L^-1.^/ 



f^p ' "^ 

i -1 


i:^'l -'1 



^^^^^^^^Hr. ' .'^BKr.J*'9|jj|Bl 

' » 











foregather for exercise 
and recreation the 
Royai and Ancient Game is 
as universal and popular as 
that blend of choice tobaccos — 
" Smith's Glasgow Mixture." 

F. & J. SMITH, Glasgow, 

Manufacturers of " ORCHESTRA" 
High-Class Virginian Cigarettes 




P" 102°^ 

Branch of the Imperial Tobacco Co. (of Great Britain niul Ireland), Ltd. y30^ 

yldvertisement Supplement 

TKc ^ Long- ser\'ice counts as value in most of our possessions. We 

Pen that become attached to books and other things, and, since the wav 
Lasts ^^^ taught us what we can do without, we treasure old friends 

amongst our household gods, and do away with everything which 
is superfluous. Gifts have taken a serviceable form for many 
years, and one of the most popular and useful of all gifts for a 
man or woman has been the famous " Swan " Fount Pen. Thou- 
sands have been sent to the soldiers and sailors, and been highly 
prized by them. A " Swan " Fount Pen is one of those treasured 
possessions no one can afford to do without. It is distinguished 
for its simplicity, strength, and entire freedom from complicated 
or wearing parts. It is accurately made, and the parts fit to a 
nicety. Balance and form have been studied to give comfort in 
writing- with large ink capacity. It is still possible to get a 
" Swan" Fount Pen at the pre-war price of half a guinea, sold 
by ali stationers and jewellers. An illustrated catalogue will be 
sent, post free, from Messrs. Mabie, Todd, and Co., Ltd., on 

Nourish- ^ We have watched the war bread get whiter and whiter, and, conse- 
ing Brown quently, more appetising, arid, maybe, have ignored the fact that 
Bread brown bread has always been g"ood, especially Bermaline best 

brown bread, which is one of the most delicious and nutritious of 
daily breads. It should be a peace-time resolution not to be lured 
away to the long-lost delights of white bread, but to remain 
faithful to brown, which is especially nourishing for children, old 
people, and invalids. There is no substitute for Bermaline best 
brown bread, which is sold by bakers at 6d. per lb. loaf. Any 
reader of the English Review who has not tried it should write 
to Bermaline Mills, Ibrox, Glasgow, for a free sample loaf, and 
address of the nearest Bermaline baker. 

An ^ Such a thing- is a novelty in these days — indeed, there is a growmg; 

Obedient (irsinclination for domestic service of any kind. But wise women 
Servant '^"^'^^ cease from troubling, and lead simpler lives. By equipping^ 

themselves with all modern conveniences in their houses and flats, 
women can afford to be entirely independent of maids. They 
have hardly realised yet the full value of gas, but lately the high 
cost and scarcity of coal have been largely responsible for the 

The English Review Advertiser 


Authors, Journalists, and Prominent Men 

and Women in every walk of life, unanimously endorse the 
World's verdict that Waterman's Ideal is by far the Best Pen. 
The outstanding feature in the construction of Waterman's 
Ideal is simplicity. This ensures that the efficiency of the 
pen when new will be maintained. If the pen pleases you 
when you buy it, it will please you still more when the use 
of it becomes second nature. 


Made in three types: "Pocket Self-Filling " and "Safety," 15/- and upwards ; 
" Regular," 10/6 and upwards. Obtainable from Stationers and Jewellers every- 
where. Absolute satisfaction guaranteed. Nibs exchangeable if not suitable. 

L. G. SLOAN, Ltd., Chc^CHCoriter, Kinirsway, London, W.C. 2 
And 39, Shaftesbury Avenue, London, W. 1 



A few drops of Tatcho 
occasionally and vigorous 
brushing — and you will 
be able to say with Mr, 
Geo. R. Sims — 

Ixskix* noinr ! 

''I^ook stti nn.y 

The very name of Tatcho inspires confidence. As Mr. 
Geo. R. Sims, the author, dramatist and philanthropist, 
said to the editor of the Dar/p Mail, "Look at my hair 
now, look at the colour. Isn't that convincing evidence 
of the value of Tatcho. Ladies confirm my good 
opinion of it." 

From Chemists and Stores evepywhere at 1/3, 2/9 and 4/6. 

P/toto by'\ 


life is shorn of most of its pleasures. Good hualtb, 
however, may be preserved, and impaired health 
restored with the aid of 'BynoGEN.' 

The most agreeable flavour 
and digestive qualities of 
'BYNOGEN' are derived 
from a malt and wheaten 
extract which it contains 
in addition to milk protein 
and organic phosphates. 

^^ *y Brinas H( 



Brings Health 

Sold by all Chemists at 1(9, 3\; Sj- and 91- 
Allen & Hanburys Ltd., London. 

increasing" demand for gas fires. The gas fire is always ready 
for use — day or night — without dust, dirt, smoke, or labour. The 
Carron patent "Stella" fire is one of the greatest advances of 
modern science, being absolutely silent in action. "Stella" fires 
radiate an intense, penetrating heat. They are artistic in design, 
beautifully finished, and made in various attractive finishes. Now 
that the war is over, and there will, be much refurbishing and 
renovation for the spring season, it will be a good time to install 
"Stella" fires. Readers of the English Review should write 
direct to the Carron Company Works, Carron, Stirlingshire, for 
a No. 3 A "Stella" Gas Fire pamphlet, which- will be sent 
free on request. 

«r. ij Ui There are few fabrics which are better known than "Viyella," 

f M* Kf ^^^ there are few people who do not use it in some form or 
another for day or night wear. Men especially value it highly 
as the ideal material for shirtings. The fact that the majority 
of officers in the British Army, many leading sportsmen and 
doctors, insist upon "Viyella " for their shirting- proves that it is 
worth while to know its advantages. The perfection of cut and 
finish and range of patterns in "Viyella " shirts ensures one getting 
just what is required, but the important factor is material, and 
for this purpose a useful and informative booklet has been written 
entitled "A Material Consideration," which everyone should read. 
It tells the story of "Viyella" from its origin to the present day, 
gives an idea of its many uses, and emphasises its good qualities 
for hosiery and underwear, as well as for shirts and ladies' blouses, 
sheets and pillow-cases. "Viyella" is soft, lig^ht and warm, 
durable, non-irritant, Artistic, and positively does not shrink ; a 
guarantee is given to replace any garments should they shrink 
in washing. 

A. E. M. B. 

or Day 


The English Review Advertiser 



The Dr. Edwin W. Alabone Treatment 

Articles are frequently appearing in the 
newspapers and magazines, written by 
persons who, whilst they deplore the 
serious loss the United Kingdom sustains 
annually through the ravages of consump- 
tion, hold out no hope of a cure being 
found. What these people write regarding 
tuberculosis naturally tends to have a very 
depressing effect on consumptives who are 
unfortunate enough to read pessimistic 
statements. We hasten to say that the 
belief in the impossibility to cure phthisis 
is absolutely without foundation, and the 
sooner the established fact that consump- 
tion can be cured is everywhere appreciated 
the better it will be for the masses. 

It is not due to the much-vaunted open- 
air measures that we are enabled to state 
that victims of consumption can be restored 
to health and strength, but to the specific 
treatment for phthisis and allied complaints 
promulgated by Dr. Edwin W. Alabone, 
which undoubtedly offers the best possible 
chance of cure. It has been put to the 
severest tests, and its success has been 
phenomenal, especially in view of the fact 
that so many of the patients cured have 
not commenced the treatment until the 
eleventh hour, after their cases had been 
given up as nopeless in other quarters. 

As we have before mentioned, any reader 
who happens to be personally interested in 
the vitally important question of the cure 
of consumption should acquaint himself 
with the modus operandi of the Alabone 
method of treatment. It would certainly 
be worth his while to do so. 

Thousands of people have been cured by 
this treatment, very many of whom have 
written telling of the benefit they have 

The following letter is of interest : — 
" Birmingham. 

"The Dr. E. W. Alabone Treatment. 

" Dear Sir, — I feel compelled to state 
briefly my firm belief in your treatment of 

" I have just concluded a six months' 
course of treatment, and I have en- 
deavoured to comply with your instructions 
kindly given me from time to time. I 
believe at the time I took up your treat- 
ment the disease had not gone very far, 
but from that time I steadily put on weight 
and my general condition gradually im- 
proved, and I am very pleased, and indeed 
thankful, to inform you that after being 

tested in many ways during the last three 
months, I am now pronounced cured. I 
have to thank you for the very business- 
like and courteous manner in which you 
have dealt with my case, including the 
prompt despatch of medicines and replies 
to inquiries I have made during my course. 
I should have no hesitation whatever in 
earnestly recommending the Alabone 
Treatment to anyone suffering from the 
disease. — I am, dear Sirs, yours faithfully, 

"A. C. H." 

This case, previous to adopting the 
Treatment, had been in a sanatorium, and 
had tried Tuberculin Injections. 


"The Dr. Edwin W. Alabone Treatment. 

" Dear Sirs, — I was yesterday examined 
by my doctor, who was very pleased with 
the result of the examination. He said 
that he could not find any trace of active 
disease, and that, in his opinion, I could 
now discontinue the Alabone Treatment. 

" I should now like to put on record my 
appreciation of the benefits I have received 
from your Treatment. 1 am sure it has 
been the means of restoring me to a state 
of good health and strength again. You 
may be sure that I shall recommend the 
Treatment to anyone suffering from Con- 
sumption with whom I may come in con- 
tact. — I remain, yours very sincerely, 

"W. S." 

The most complete information on this 
important question will be gladly supplied 
on application to the Secretary, The Dr. 
Edwin W. Alabone Treatment, Lynton 
House, 12 Highbury Quadrant, London, 

Of course, we need hardly point out that 
what has now come to be known as "The 
Alabone Treatment " for Consumption and 
Asthma is not a success in every instance ; 
naturally some do not recover; neverthe- 
less, the claim is perfectly justified that in 
the great majority of cases it is possible 
to effect genuine and lasting cures, even 
where the disease is far advanced. 

One cannot do better than advise any 
reader to obtain a copy of Dr. Alabone's 
important book, "The Cure of Consump- 
tion, Asthma, Bronchitis, and other Dis- 
eases of the Chest," now in its 4gth 
edition, 174th thousand, which will be for- 
warded for 2S. 6d., post free, from Lynton 
House, 12 Highbury Quadrant, London, 

The English Review Advertiser 



By BOYD CABLE, Author of " Between the Lines." 6s. net. " A thrilling addition to 
Boyd Cable's list of excellent war books." — Westminster Gazette. 

DANGER ! and other Stories 

By ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE, Author of "His Last Bow," "Adventures of Sherlock 
Holmes."' 6s. net. "The contents of this volume all bear the hall-mark of the author. 
There is no more capable craftsman than the inventor of Sherlock Holmes." — Daily Chronicle. 



Mr. Woods is a well-known and recognised authority on the Near East of the countries of 
which he has made a profound study on the spot. With Illustrations and Maps. 12s. net. 


By Captain ROBhRT W. MACKENNA, M.D'. The book, which is written with the 
same literary charm as the Author's " Adventure of Death," is frankly optimistic. It is 
designed to prove that the goal of Nature is Life : the aim of Life is the development of 
Intelligence ; and the object of Intelligence is a knowledge of God. 6s. net. 


M.A., R.E. By STANLEY LANE POOLE, LiTT.D. 7s. 6d. net. 


Tlie Story of the making of an Army. By Colonel FREDERICK PALMER, of the 
U.S. Army, Author of " My First Year of the War," "With the New Army on the Somme," 
etc. 7S. 6d. net. " [Ready shortly. 

JOHN MURRAY, Albemarle Street, London, W.I. 



THERE is no magazine in the world just like IMPRESSIONS. It treats 
business as the most important thing in material life, and shows in a 
fascinating manner how easy it is to get pleasure and a living at the same time. 
There are no technical articles in IMPRESSIONS. The great subject of business 
is handled in a way which provides inspiration for all, whatever their profession 
or trade or calling. IMPRESSIONS stands for better business and better living 
in the highest sense of the term. It is the monthly mentor of our biggest business 
men, and in its own circle carries an influence more powerful than outsiders can 
understand. It is edited by G. E. Whitehouse, who, in a remarkably short time, 
has earned for himself an international reputation for being the most interesting 
yet fearless writer on Business subjects. He writes a large part of the magazine 
each month ; says what he thinks, and thinks so nearly right, that big men believe 
in him and applaud his views. IMPRESSIONS is a big magazine, 1 1 in. x 9| in., 
with 48 pages, full of sound editorials and high grade advertising. If you believe 
in progress you will like this magazine, though you may not agree with everything 
it prints. 


Sample copy for six pennt/ stamps. 


The English Review Advertiser 






There is a flavour of old 
Madeira about it . . . 

" King's Head " 

is similar 

but stronger 

Both are sold everywhere 
Hid per oz 

Tins: 2 oz l/ll— 4oz 3/10 

Three Nuns 


5|d for 10 — lid for 20 
Boxes of 50 2/2i — 100 4/3 


Imperial Tobacco Co (of Great Britain & Ireland) Ltd 

35 St. Andrew Square, Glasgow 




By Appointment 

^ Ensure a com- 
fortable warmth in 
the home by using 

Electric Fires. 

^ A touch of the switch 
gives an instant ruddy "fire 
like " glow, without 
dust, smoke or fumes. 

^ Heat is under perfect 
control. No labour involved 
— economical in use. 

Sold by all Electrical Engineers, 
Contractors, etc. 

No. 36 Illustrated and descriptive Electric 
Appliance Pamphlet J ree on te-iuest. 


Branch Works : Phoenix Foundry, Sheffield. 

On view at the Coiitpany s 
Sh(nt<ro(mis : — London (Citv, is, 
Upper Thames St., E.G. 4 ; West 
End, 50, Berners St., Oxford ra,^!^^ 
St., W. i), Liverpool, Glasgow, \^^'»> 
Edinburgh, Bristol, Newcastle- 
on-Tyne, and Birmingham. 



The English Review Advertiser 


Edited by Austin Harrison 

1. Sub.-Lt. CHARLES L. 

2nd-Lt. E. J. DOOUSS 
Sapper W. H. PITCHER 
Lt.-Col. M. M. HALDANE 



The Pool 


The Triumph 


Moths : A Fantasy 


She to Him 






'' Out from the Infinite " 87 
Classic American 
Literature (iv) 88 

[Contents continued on page x. 

The book that everyone is talking of. 



" Ii must inevitably assure its author her 
proper place among the poets of her time. 
.... One of the most striking pieces of 
imagery in modern poetry." 

• Arthur Waugh in The Bookman. 

" Miss Stuart at one leap takes her place 
among^t the most considerable poets of 
to-day. . . . She has recaptured the 
primitive beauty which lies deep under 
the dust of our civilisation." 
Louis McQuillan D in The New Witness. 

"It is by her power of expression that 
the writer is distinguished . . . has all the 
freshness of a morning in Greece." 

Saturday Review. 

4/- net. 

METHUEN LTD., 36 Essex Street, Strand, W.C. 2 


Best Brown Bread 

February weather often 
increases the ills to which 
men arc born. Therefore 
give careful attention to 
nourishment, especially for 
children, old people, and 
invalids. Bread is the staff 
of life. And there is no 
substitute whatever for 
Bermaline Best Brown 
Bread, sold by bakers at 
6d. per lb. loaf. A delicious 
and nutritious daily bread 

Wrilt lo Bermaline Mills, Ibrox, Glasgow, 

for Free Sample Loaf and address of nearest 

Btrmaline Baker. 


The English Review Advertiser 

The " De Reszke" Art Gallery 

Picture Offer 

To " De Reszke" Smokers 

This picture, printed in colours 

on fine art paper, 15X10 ins., 

will be sent to any smoker 

forwarding to address below a 

" De Reszke " box lid and 4d. 

(or without box lid, is.), 

mentioning Picture 

No. 64. 

Miss Jose Collins 

who plays Teresa in "The Maid of the Mountains," 


Among other representative opinions are the follotoing: 

Sir A. M. S. Methuen, 
Bart., writes : 
" Excellent." 

Leon Morton, Esq., writes: 

" Vos ' De Reszke ' Cigarettes sont 
excellentes et, chose precieuse pour 
/^ • ^^ A 1 les acteurs, elles ne font pas tousser ! " 

V^^lfiTQir'CLtCS "Your'De Reszke ' Cigarettes are 

C9 excellent and a precious thing for 

actors ; they do not make one cough ! " 

AMERICAN— V:i for 9|d. ; 25 for 2/- ; 50 for 3/U ; 100 for 7/8. TENOR— 10 for 1/3 

"HE Reszi^k 

^ The^r/stocmt o/''^ 


Prof. Spenser Wilkinson 

writes : 

" I have not been a cigarette 
smoker for many years, but 1 find 
that your ' De Reszke ' Cigarettes 
are highly appreciated by my young 

Neil Kenyon, Esq., writes: 

" Many thanks for the ' De Reszke ' 
Cigarettes. 1 like them immensely." 

25 for 2/10* ; 60 for 5/7 ; 100 for 10/9. 

^OLD EFERTfVHERE, or post free from/. Millhof^ Co., Ltd. {Dept. 8l), 86, Piccadilly, 

London, W. i, 

The English Review Advertiser 

CONTENTS (continued) 

3. Major C. H. DOUGLAS 





8. The Rt. Hon. AMEER ALI 




The Pyramid of Power 

(ii) 100 

Two and Two 108 

The Garb of Peace 111 

The Two Lovers 117 

The Impending 

Triumph of Labour 126 

Persia and the 

Conference 134 

The Problem of Russia 140 

Indemnities and 

Bolshevism 150 

A New Order? 160 

Books 173 



Navy Cut Tobacco 

Packed in varying degrees of strength to suit every class of smoker. 


Player's Gold Leaf Navy Cut - - / W ^\ \A 
Player's Medium Navy Cut - - 

Player's "Tawny" Navy Cut - 
Player's "White Label" Navy Cut 



AI30 Player's Navy Cut de Luxe (a development of Player's Navy Cut) 
packed in 2-oz. and 4-oz. Airtight Tins at 2/1 and 4/2 respectively. 

This Tobacco is also supplied at Duty Free Rates for the purpose of 
gratuitoua distribution to wounded Soldiers and Sailors in Hospital 


Terms and particulars on application to 

PLAYER & SONS, Nottingham. 


Branch of the Imperial Tobacco Co. (of Great Britain and Ireland) Ltd. 

The English Review Advertiser 



Gas Lighting for 

THE artificial illumination of living 
rooms — and particularly of work- 
ing rooms — is a matter of considerable 
hygienic importance. 

It has been fully discussed by two 
scientific authorities of the highest stand- 
ino", the late Professor Vivian B. Lewes 
and Dr. S. Rideal, in the light of careful 
experiments made by them ; and their 
conclusions on the pre-eminently healthful nature 
of incandescent gas as an illuminant should be 
widely known, more especially since these touch 
upon national economy — conservation o\ coal 
and recovery of valuable residual products — as 
well as upon hygiene. 

Free copies of these Reports can be 
obtained on application to the Secretary 


47 Victoria Street^ Westminster, S,W. I 



The English Review Advertiser 

viKtamieam K»tm)i » r i mtt»tti aMif»»tt>»xitiKmi«et<»>yy»r^mn^jn'/i^^ 



in arrears ? 

MOST busy people find that they 
have little time for letter writing. 
And yet it is a mistake to get out ot 
touch with our friends, especially those 
who are waiting eagerly for news. We 
not only disappoint them but deprive 
ourselves of the pleasure of their replies. 
A "Swan" Fountpen makes it easy for 
you to utilise your odd moments and 
write regularly. The "Swan" is always 
at hand and ready to write orf the 
instant. The smooth gold nib — exactly 
suited to your hand— makes writing a 
pleasure and lasts a lifetime with 
reasonable care. 

At pre=war prices from 10/6 

MABIE, TODD & CO., Ltd., London, 

Manchester, Paris, Zurich, Sydney, Toronto, &c. 

Associate House — New York and Chicago. 




Patterns <^^^:^'S?|iii, 

'.?/ pre-war *«? 

prices W^ii;^ 

10/6 ^^ Stationers and Jewellers 

Illustrated Catalogue post free. 




February, 191 9 

Soldiers' Poetry (iv 
The Pool 

By Sub.-Lt. Charles L. Morgan, R.N.D, 

Now for a space, O Comforter, withhold 
The wayward heart from troubling ; turn the eyes 
Away from present ghosts, and lead the soul 
Into Thy quiet ways where lions roam 
Not, nor the tiger's satined eye darts fire ; 
Where the ribbed wolf treads not the snow nor wails 
Hungrily, nor the owl makes sky and tree 
Terrible with his mourning. Let my feet 
Tread without fear Thy groves, and pause awhile 
By forest pools wherein the wandering beasts 
Drink peacefully in need's communion. 
There let me rest, for where the leopard comes, 
And where the deer, with calm, unstartled eye, 
Has place beside him, there may even man, 
Most sad, because most sentient, of all creatures, 
Stoop, drink, and see reflected in the waters, 
Not his own face, but Christ's who died for him. 

Then shall I cease to mourn with simple tears 
For those who are caught up and set apart 
From grief. Once they were prisoners in chains : 
Then were they visited while no man watched, 
And heard their names and rose. Their fetters broke 
Soundless, and through no visible door they went 
Into a night of stars. Then cried their guards. 
Not that their forms were gone, but that they passed 
As it were a sudden wind, blowing from whence 
None knew, and tending whither all men wondered. 



And now they wear life's spiritual garment 
Purged of the traveller's dust, and may perceive 
The fineness of its texture, woven of dreams, 
CleaQ of the decoration of desire. 
So do their eyes confront the stars undazzled. 
They take the hand of Christ as of a friend 
Well known, well tried. And death is unto them 
The memory of triumph, whence they came 
Wearing the victor's crown, and were admitted 
Into a room cool with the summer's dusk, 
Where they do sup from whitened wood and silver 
In company of friends. 

I dare not mourn 
For victors. I may never pour forth tears 
For them who do not weep, but rather draw 
Strength from them. Set me free, O Comforter, 
And lead me to Thy sacred pool, that there, 
When I look up, mine eyes may witness how 
Stedfast the heavens are. Above Thy pool 
No branches twist to interrupt the stars 
By night, nor is the sun obscured. I know 
That there I may behold all that I love 
Set out in order, freed of fear and hate, 
As are the loves of them that die. Therefore, 
Show me the path we traverse commonly 
With winged feet while they, not yet escaped, 
Mourn vainly, little knowing that the dust 
They weep for once defiled garments now white, 
And once obscured a vision now grown clear. 
Protect me in Thy peace, if for one hour. 
Soon shall the pool vanish, soon shall the eye 
Flame in the tiger, and the wolf return 
Into the vaulted lair. Then will I go 
Once more to daily paths, and fear once more. 

The Triumph 

By 2nd Lt. F. J. Doouss 

From heights of wonder and delight, 
How is the proud world fallen away 

And made the mockery of spite ! 
What is our triumph, who shall say ? 

All the ripe progress of the years 

Is sunk in pitiless decay, 
And worse than vanity appears. 

What is our triumph, who can say? 

The sun lights with a murderous red 
Weeds of corruption, wet with slime, 

That cover all our unknown dead 

Whom Fate struck down, defeating Time. 

This hideous ruin doth outface 

The silent majesty of Heaven; 
Nothing is left of form or grace. 

But beauty from its base is riven. 

And* still with voiceless gaping cries 

In a mute agony of shame, 
That night with sympathetic skies 

Might close around its shattered frame. 

But here perceive flung in the mire 
The glutted instruments of death; 

But yesterday disgorging fire. 

Now coldly silent, lacking breath. 

Ashes? Yea, and their hopes are dust! 

For they who served and they who fed 
Are in their infamy and lust 

Most utterly discomfited. 

This is our triumph (some had spoken. 

Saying, that when the sword pierced through, 

The earth should fail, all else being broken) 
Behold ! the sword is broken, too ! 

E 2 

Moths: A Fantasy 

By Capt. "Leslie Hubert" 

When I was a Purple Emperor 

And ruled in the oak-wood high, 
Ah ! You were a little timid thing- 
Ready to start and fly; 
Ah ! You were a little gentle thing, 
But a Lord of the Air was L 
And the secret wood 
To its inmost lair 
Was our own to roam 
In the soft night air, 
.Was our cool, dark home 
And our garden fair. 
Ah i Do you remember those nights of May 
With the moon-mist stealing the stars away? 

Each night was passed in carnival, 

Each day in a long repose, 
For Day is loud and vulgar-bright. 

As the deep-wood lover knows ; 
But pale Twilight is a jewel white 
That leans from the dusky brows of Night 
And pours kind radiance over all 

That her soft brown arms enclose ; 
In the dim half-light we took to wing 

'Neath the deepening purple sky. 
When you were a little tender thing 

And a Prince of the Night was I. 
Ah ! Do you remember those nights of June, 
And the wet dawns breaking all too soon ? 

She to Him 

By Lt. Geoffrey Dearmer 

The day you died, from Yea to Nay, 
I wavered, prey 
To Grief; / 

Hither and thither, like a leaf. 


(Hush, for the wind may hear) 

Soon, soon you came in solitude ; 

And we renewed 

All happiness. 

Now, who shall guess 

How close we are, my dear ? 

(Hush, for the wind may hear.) 


Other women wait, 

Their doors ajar; 

And listen, listen, listen, 

For the gate — 

And murmur, " Soon, the war 

Will seem a far. 

Dim agony of sleep." 

May I be joyful, too, 
That day. 
For love of you 
May I not turn away 
Nor — weep. 


By Sapper W. H. Pitcher 

I PLUCKED the roses from her cheeks 

And planted them in May, 
I culled the pansies from her eyes 

And hid the blooms away. 
And now she wonders why I love 

The month that gave them birth, 
And gather diadems for her 

When May is on the earth. 

I took the profile of her face 

And bound it in a book, 
And in that volume I embalmed 

The beauty of each look. 
And every smile and every frown 

I consecrate, for then 
I take the perfume of her breath 

To fill the flowing pen. 

I told my story to a flower 

That sheltered in a dell. 
It nestled by a laughing stream. 

Whose tinkling waters fell. 
And every May it comes again. 

Just in the self-same place, 
And opens as it listens to 

The story of her face. 


By Lt.-Col. M. M. Haldane 

The heat haze blots the landscape out of sight, 
The hills in shimmering mirage appear, 
Palm, banyan, and bamboo are brown and sere, 

The gaping earth gasps for the cooling night 

From thirsty crevices ; o'erpowering light 
Hits like ten thousand hammers everywhere 
And drowns all form and colour, far and near, 

In one great merciless, blinding glare of white. 

Oh ! to be in the dripping woods at home, 

Where like old friends the misty mountains stand, 

To watch the burns leap down in floods of foam, 

To feel upon my face the western wind. 
To look once more upon my native land 

And leave this cruel India far behind ! 

'' Out from the Infinite 

By Wilfrid J. Jenkins (Telegraphist) 

Out from the Infinite I come 

To earth, alone; 
Drowned in the great world's hum. 

Unsought, unknown. 

Souls, like to mine, I find. 

Accept, embrace. 
Claiming a common mind 

Pervading space. 

Forth to the Infinite I go 

To Life Divine; 
Friends I learn here to know 

Are ever mine. 


Studies in Classic American 
Literature (iv 

By D. H. Lawrence 

. Fenimore Cooper's Anglo-American Novels. 

We have seen that, when we try to trace our consciousness 
to its source and fountain-head, we must approach the great 
nerve-centres of the sympathetic and voluntary system. We 
have seen further that the moment we enter this field of primal 
or pre-cerebral consciousness we enter the field of duality. 
Science has of late asserted the universal law of polarity — a 
law of dual poles. This law applies as much to the human 
psyche as to the cosmic forces. 

From the sympathetic centres in the abdomen rush out the 
vital vibrations of our first-being, our first-consciousness. In 
the solar plexus, and the other centres of the lower body, we 
have the inscrutable well-heads whence the living self bubbles 
up and enters into creation. What lies before is a mystery, 
and must ever remain a mystery. When we follow the 
mystery to its gates we find it entering by the great sympa- 
thetic plexuses of the body, entering and appearing in 
spontaneous motion and spontaneous consciousness. And 
we find that at its very entry this motion, this being, this con- 
sciousness, is dual. What we know as sensual consciousness 
has its fountain-head in the plexus of the abdomen ; what we 
know as spiritual consciousness has its issue in the cardiac 
plexus, the great sympathetic centre within the thorax. Our 
mental consciousness is a third thing, resultant from this 
duality in pre-cerebral cognition. But connected with the 
lower or sensual system we have the mouth, which tastes and 
embraces, the nostrils which smell, and the ears which hear. 
Connected with the spiritual system of the upper body we 
have the eyes which see, and the hands which touch. 

This knowledge, which is the very beginning of psycho- 
logy — the psyche comprising our whole consciousness, 
physical, sensual, spiritual, pre-cerebral as well as cerebral — 


seems to have been familiar to the pagan priesthoods and to 
the esoteric mystics of the past. We can only begin to under- 
stand the initiation into the religious mysteries, such as the 
Eleusinian mysteries, when we can grasp the rise of pre- 
cerebral consciouness in the great plexuses, and the 
movement of passional or dynamic cognition from one centre 
to another, towards culmination or consummation in what we 
may call whole-experience, or whole-consciousness. 

It is quite certain that the pre-Christian priesthoods under- 
stood the processes of dynamic consciousness, which is pre- 
cerebral consciousness. It is certain that St. John gives us 
in the Apocalypse a cypher-account of the process of the 
conquest of the lower or sensual dynamic centres by the upper 
or spiritual dynamic consciousness, a conquest affected centre 
by centre, towards a culmination in the actual experience of 
spiritual infinitude. This account is of scientific exactitude. 
But the cypher of symbols and number-valuation is exceed- 
ingly complicated. None the less it can be solved. And 
then we realise that the old, immense religions were estab- 
lished upon a scientific knowledge so immediate and profound 
that we cannot grasp it. They understood — at least, those 
initiated understood — the rise and movement of the dynamic 
consciousness in the individual, that which we might call our 
unconsciousness or sub-consciousness, but which is more than 
these, and which, though in very fact the bulk of our being 
and knowing, is regarded from our mental standpoint as 
nothmg, or nothingness. That which we regard as nothing, 
that which is our pre-cerebral cognition, this the priests under- 
stood as the great dynamic human consciousness, the mind 
being no more than an abstract from it. And this profound 
priestly understanding was scientific in its exactitude. It 
was of necessity symbolic in its expression — as when, in the 
Eleusinian mysteries, a golden snake was crowded into the 
bosom of the postulant, and drawn forth from the lowest part 
of the body — because there are perhaps no mental terms to 
express, at least dynamically, that which takes place. But in 
fact of -process the initiation was a piece of most profound 
scientific exposition, perfectly expressing the secret and vital 
movement of the psyche in its pre-cerebral activities. 

This priestly knowledge, however, was inevitably sensual. 
The sensual understanding was the living field of the ancient 
world. The one-sidedness of exclusively sensual under- 
standing caused the downfall of the old systems. The 
Greeks seem to have discovered the process of the conquest of 


the sensual centres by the spiritual consciousness. They 
worked this into an esoteric system, quite scientific, and much 
more profound, nearer the quick, than anything we have since 
known in psychology. But their knowledge still was based 
upon the sensual activities, even though it were but the know- 
ledge of the process of conquest of these activities. And if 
we were ever to escape into spiritual freedom, into pure 
spiritual or upper understanding, what we have called free- 
dom itself, then all idea of duality would have to be wiped 
out, the sensual understanding would have to be blanked out, 
as if it did not exist. 

Which is what the early Christian world proceeded to do, 
by amazing instinct. The Gnostics, the Manicheans, all those 
strange and obscure sects which really derived their under- 
standing from the Greek esotericism, or from the Persian, 
were destroyed by the new rising instinct, the instinctive 
passionate longing to be freed from the sensual self alto- 
gether, and from the whole body of ancient understanding. 
For the sensual consciousness, hopelessly dominant, had 
become destructive and tyrannical in the human psyche. 
Hence the strange wild rage of Byzantine — or Greek — 
Christianity, the frenzy of destruction that possessed 
it. Hence a world gone mad over the intricacies, to us 
nonsensical, of the Homoousion. Slaves were as mad as 
priests over these mystical absurdities. But it was not absurd. 
It was a subtle, amazing process of displacing utterly, even 
destroying, one body of knowledge, one way of dynamic 
cognition, and giving all the scope to the other body. The 
curious decisions of the early Councils, the Council of Nice, 
and the General Councils, only show us how perfect the 
instinct was which rejected every trace of the old true science 
— every trace save, perhaps, the unreadable riddle of the 

Now, after two thousand years of effort, we have so sub- 
jected the centres of sensual cognition that they depend 
automatically on the upper centres. Now, after two thousand 
years, having established our knowledge and even our experi- 
ence all in one sort, a halfness, we find ourself in a prison. 
We reach the condition when we are so imprisoned in the cul 
de sac of our mutilated psyche that we are in the first stages of 
that madness and self-destruction into which the ancients 
fell when they were imprisoned and driven mad within the cul 
de sac of the sensual body. Quos vult ferdere Jufiter, 
dementat frius. 


What lies before us is either escape or death. We choose 
death. But is that any escape? We are always faced with 
the problem of the immortality of the soul. We elude it by 
imagining that souls can dissolve into an infinite, evaporate 
away as liquids can evaporate into space. But since the very 
definition of a soul is that it is a unique entity, how can that 
which is a unique entity remain itself by merging into the 
infinite.'* It can only lose itself by so doing. And the soul 
does not lose itself in death. 

We can no longer believe in angels, though we try. And 
all our efforts will not win from our souls a belief in dis- 
embodied spirits which cluster innumerable in the invisible 
ether. What we believe we believe without knowing it, first 
of all. In the first place, my belief lies in my active breast 
and in my active belly, potent there. I have to find the mental 
idea which will correspond. 

The only thing to do is for each man to remember his own 
dead. Do we imagine our dead lying in some distant 
grave ? — our own dead ? We do not. Do we imagine them 
merged into some infinite .'^ For my part, I find this impos- 
sible. When I hush my soul perfectly, to attend, as it were, 
to the dead I have loved and love, then I find that it is non- 
sense to try to project my attention in any outward direction, 
either upward or downward, or into universal space. My 
dead is neither above nor below, nor everywhere. My own 
dead, whom I have loved and love, is with me, within me, here, 
now, at one with me, and not elsewhere. 

Those that die return to the most beloved, enter in, and at 
last live in peace, gladly, at one with the most beloved. So 
that the living are always living. The present is one and 
unbreakable. The present is not a fleeting moment. 
Moments may flee, but I am here. And with me is one who 
is dead and who yet lives in me. So that all life is always 
living, and the Present is one and unbroken. The Present 
is always present, as the sun is always present. It is eternity 
that is an abstraction, an inference reached by negation of the 
present. My immortality lies in being present in life. And 
the dead have presence in the living. So that the dead are 
always present in life, here, in the flesh, always. It is inex- 
plicable how they are present in us, but it is a physical fact 
that they are. So are the unborn which issue from us. 
Here, in our tissue, we know it, lie the unborn. And as surely, 
here, in our tissue, live the dead, present, and always present. 

The great problem of the survival of the soul is not the 

E* 2 


same, however, as that of the survival of the will after death. 
The human self is not the same as the individual will. The 
self is the inexplicable, the mystery. The will is the dynamic 
force which belongs to the self, but which is subject to the 
consciousness, the mental consciousness. So that the mental 
ego. can fix the will and use it in contravention to the primal 
spontaneous self. Which very often happens. 

W^hen, through the fixing of the will, a deadlock ensues in 
the soul, our living becomes an automatic process. And then 
the soul is frustrated, coiled, angry. Will death release this 
deadlock, save the soul from frustration ? It will not. Only 
living will fulfil a frustrated soul. 

Now, many of our dead have died in the misery of this 
frustration; automatised and unable to live, they have even 
sought death as an escape, only to find it no escape. Souls 
frustrated in life are not fulfilled by death, save they die in a 
passionate consummation. Souls that find in death itself a 
passionate consummation return to us appeased, and add the 
beauty and richness of their presence to us. But what of the 
souls that are caught out of life unliberated and unappeased? 
They return to us unfree and giming, terrible ghosts. They 
enter into us angrily and fill us with their destructive presence. 
There is no peace in death to those who die in the terrible 
deadlock of frustration. And if there is no peace for them, 
there is none for us. They return home to us. They are the 
angry, unappeased shades that come darkly home to us, 
thronging home to us from over the seas, entering our souls 
and filling us with madness, ever more and more madness, 
unless we, by our active living, shall give them the life that 
they demand, the living motions that were frustrated in them 
now liberated and made free. 

This explains the futility of sacrifice. What use is it to 
me if a man sacrifice and murder his living desires for me, only 
to return in death and demand this sacrifice again of me, ten- 
fold ? What is the use of a mother's sacrificing herself for her 
children if after death her unappeased soul shall perforce 
return upon the child and exact from it all the fulfilment that 
should have b^en attained in the living flesh, and was 
not? We cannot help this returning of our soul back into the 
living. What we can help is its returning unappeased and 
destructive. We have now the hosts of weary, clamorous, 
unsatisfied dead to appease by our living. If we cannot 
appease them we shall go on dying until somewhere, in som^ 
unknown people, life can start afresh. 


Which brings us to Fenimore Cooper and the Red 
Indians. Franklin had an equation in providential 
mathematics : — 

Rum + Savage = o. 

It is a specious little equation. Proceeding like that we might 
add up the universe to nought. 

Rum plus Savage may equal a dead savage. But is a dead 
savage nought? Bullet plus Yankee may equal a dead 
Yankee. But is a dead Yankee nought, either? 

The Aztec is gone, the Red Indian, the Esquimo, the Incas, 
the Patagonian — and whither? Oil sont les neiges d'anian? 
They are not far to seek. They are no further off than the 
coming snows. 

Do we imagine that the Aztecs are installed within the souls 
of the present Mexicans? And are the Red Men at home 
within the breasts of the Yankees of to-day ? Assuredly the 
dead Indians have their place in the souls of present-day 
Americans, but whether they are at peace there is another 
question. It is said that Americans begin to show obvious 
Red Indian qualities. But they show no signs of peace in 

It is plain that the American is not at one with the Red 
Man whom he has perforce lodged into his own soul. It is a 
dangerous thing to destroy any vital existence out of life. 
For then the destroyer becomes responsible, in his own living 
body, for the destroyed. Upon the destroyer devolves the 
necessity of continuing the nature and being of the destroyed. 
This is an axiom. It follows from the law of polarity. If we 
destroy one pole, the other collapses, or becomes doubly 
responsible. The tiger destroys deer. If all deer are 
destroyed, the tiger collapses. Similarly, if all tigers are 
destroyed, deer will collapse, for then there is no equipoise 
to keep them vivid in their being. Between the beast preda- 
tive and the beast ruminative is a balance in polarity, and 
the destruction of either pole is a destruction of both in the 
long run. 

With humanity it is not quite so simple. When the White 
American destroys the Red Indian, he either ultimately brings 
about his own destruction or he takes upon himself the respon- 
sibility for the continuing and perfecting of the passional soul 
of the destroyed. This is true of any creatures, balanced 
either in a true polarity of love or of enmity. The Aztec lives 
unappeased and destructive within the Mexican, the Red 


Indian lives unappeased and inwardly destructive in the 

It is presumable, however, that at length the soul of the 
dead red man will be at one with the soul of the living 
white man. And then we shall have a new race. Mean- 
while, the will is fixed in the white man ; he works his auto- 
matic conclusions. How different is the deep, unexpressed 
passion in the American, from the automatic spiritual ego 
which he demonstrates to the world, this is a matter for the 
world to discover later on. 

Fenimore Cooper very beautifully gives the myth of the 
atonement, the communion betv/een the soul of the white man 
and the soul of the Indian. He also gives the frenzied, weary 
running-on of the self-determined ego, the mechanical 
spiritual being of America. Here are two classes of books — 
the famous Leatherstocking Series, and what we will call the 
Anglo-American Series, such as Homeward Bound, Eve 
Effingha^n, The Sfy, The Pilot, and others, stories concern- 
ing white Americans only. These last are now almost 
forgotten. They are thin and bloodless. But they are not 
by any means without point, for Cooper was a profound and 
clever man. 

Cooper himself was rich and of good family. His father 
founded Cooperstown, in the Eastern States. Fenimore 
was a gentleman of culture. He shows in Ho^neward Bound 
how bound he was, hand and foot, to the European culture- 

It should not be forgotten how intensely cultured these 
Americans of the early nineteenth century were. It is only 
necessary to read their familiar literature, the light verse, to 
know that they were much more raffine than Englishmen have 
ever been. In this matter of refined material culture, 
external and disillusioned, the Americans were ahead even 
of the French. Cooper quotes a Frenchman, who says, 
" n Amenque est pounie avant d'etre mtirer And there is a 
great deal in it. America was not taught by France — by 
Baudelaire, for example. Baudelaire learned his lesson from 

The Efhnghams are three extremely refined, genteel 
Americans who are homeward bound from England to 
the States. Their party consists of father, daughter, and 
uncle, and faithful nurse. The daughter has just finished her 
education in Europe. She has, indeed, skimmed the cream 
off Europe. England, France, Italy, and Germany have 


nothing more to teach her. She is a bright and charming, 
admirable creature ; a real modern heroine ; intrepid, calm, and 
self-collected, yet admirably impulsive, always in perfectly 
good taste ; clever and assured in her speech, like a man, but 
withal charmingly deferential and modest before the stronger 
sex. It is the perfection of the public female, — a dreadful, 
self-determined thing, cold and mechanical and factitious. 

On board is the other type of American, the parvenu, the 
demagogue, who has done Europe and put it in his breeches 
pocket, in a month. No European writer has ever given us 
such a completely detestable picture of an American as did the 
American Cooper. Septimus Dodge is the object of loathing 
and contempt to the Effinghams. Yet they cannot get away 
from him — neither on ship-board nor even when they reach 
their own estates. He is the bugbear of their lives — but he is 
the inevitable negative pole of their Americanism. 

Mr. Dodge, the democrat, of Dodgetown, alternately 
fawns and intrudes, cringes and bullies. For the Effinghams 
are most terribly " superior " in a land of equality. No 
foreign count was ever as icily superior to his lowest peasant 
as are the Effinghams to their successful, democratic com- 
patriot, Septimus. Mr. Dodge cringes like the inferior he 
really is. But he is an American, and by asserting his demo- 
cratic equality he gets the haughty Effinghams on the hip. 
They writhe — but Septimus has them fast. They will not 
escape. What tortures await them in the free land of 
America, at the hands of tlTe persecuting Dodge ! There, all 
their superiority writhes transfixed on the horns of the Dodge 
dilemma, the acute dilemma of democratic equality. 

Through these American-social books of Fenimore 
Cooper — at least, through the most significant — runs this same 
helpless struggle with a false position. People are not free to 
be people. They are all of them all the while impaled on a 
false social assumption, and all their passion and movement 
works back to this social assumption. They are never full, 
spontaneous human beings. All the while they are mere 
social units, social conscious, never passionately individual. 
For this reason the books are empty of life, while they are full 
of sharp social observation. 

Miss Effingham never confronts Mr. Dodge as a real 
individual confronts another. She is a social unit confronting 
another social unit. She is a democrat — or at least a repub- 
lican — confronting her fellow-democrat. And no matter how 
she despises and detests Mr. Dodge, the individual, she has in 


some degree to accept an equality with him as an American 
citizen. All her patrician nature rebels. But it is mercilessly 
impaled. She pushes a pin through her haughty, winged soul, 
and pins it down on the Contrat Social. There it writhes and 
flaps ignominious. All her loves and adventures move us not 
at all. How can they? What do pursuits at sea, fleeing 
scoundrels, lords in disguise, shipwrecks, ferocious savages of 
the Sahara — ^what do these amount to to a soul which is pinned 
down on the Contrat Social? Nothing at all. Nothing 
matters, save the pin which holds down Eve Effingham on the 
same card with Septimus Dodge. 

Yet Eve Effingham will die rather than pull out tJie pin. 
She will die rather than simply dismiss Septimus as a hopeless 
inferior — a natural inferior. He is the thorn in the proud 
Effingham flesh. But the Effinghams love their thorn. They 
believe in the equality of men and in the Rights of Man. 
They believe tremendously in social freedom. This is why 
they have impaled their souls. First, they are republican, 
American citizens. And then, a long way behind, they are 
living individuals. 

Which is nonsense. A man is, and can be, no more than 
himself : his own single, starry self, which has its place 
inscrutably in the firmament of existence. But if a man is to 
be himself he must be free. That is, by general consent all 
men must be free to be themselves. Nothing could be more 
just or wise. 

But to go on from this, and declare that all men are equal, 
and even, ultimately, identical, is nonsense. When men are 
most truly themselves, then the difference is most real and 
most evident. And it is not only a difference in kind, it is a 
difference in degree. Eve EflSngham is not only a finer being 
than Septimus Dodge, she is by nature a superior being. 
Septimus should yield her the reverence and respect due to a 
higher type from a lower. And she should implicitly com- 
mand that reverence and respect. 

Instead of which, Septimus, having money in his pocket, 
presumes that the difference between him and the Effinghams 
is a mere impertinence on their part, which ought to be done 
away with. And they feel a little guilty and confused by 
their own instinctive superiority. If this is not the ruin of all 
high things, and the triumph of all base things, what is? It 
is like the Buddhists who bless the lice that eat them, 
because all life is sacred. 

Democracy as we have it is mere falsity. It is true that 


the aristocratic system of the past is arbitrary and false. But 
it is not so arbitrary and false as our present democratic 
system. Every man knows that intrinsically men are not 
equal. Intrinsically, in his true self which issues from the 
mystery and is a term of the Godhead, one man is either 
greater or less than another man, or perhaps approximately 
equal. But the deepest social truth about men is that some 
are higher, some lower, some greater, some less, some highest, 
and some lowest, even in the sight of the everlasting God. 
To pretend anything else is mere sophistry. Some men are 
born from the mystery of creation, to know, to lead, and to 
command. And some are born to listen, to follow, to obey. 
Each man has his beauty and his wholeness in fulfilling his 
own true nature, whether it be the fulfilment of command or of 
service. And all that democracy needs to do is to arrange the 
material world so that each man can be intrinsically himself, 
yielding service where he must instinctively yield respect or 
reverence, and taking command where instinctively he feels 
his own authority. 

The old aristocratic system at least recognised this prime 
reality of the intrinsic and holy disquality between men. It 
was wrong in establishing an artificial distinction of mere 
birth. If we are to recognise true beauty and superiority it 
must be from the inmost sincere soul ; we cannot proceed on 
accidents of heredity. But the aristocratic system was not so 
wrong as the democratic, which refuses, theoretically, to recog- 
nise any intrinsic difference at all, and asserts that, since no 
man is higher than another, since we are all leaves of grass, no 
man shall presume to put the grass in the shade. No man is 
any higher than another man ; no soul has any intrinsic right to 
command another soul. So says democracy. And if this is 
not far more arbitrary, far more sweeping, and far more deadly 
than any arbitrary aristocratic system, then there is no reality 
in living whatsoever. All men must be mown level with the 
grass, because most men, the average, are leaves of grass, 
and therefore it would be impertinent and arrogant to rise 
above the grass. So we mow life down. 

Worse still. Though no man is higher than any other 
man, intrinsically, still, some men are superior mechanically. 
Some men are more productive materially than others. They 
know how to combine the mechanical forces of the universe to 
bring forth material produce. Those that can most success- 
fully subject living and being to the mechanical forces, destroy 
the intrinsic self and substitute the machine unit, thereby 


increasing material production, let them be lords of material 
production. Let money rule. 

Which is the inevitable outcome of democracy — Liberty, 
Equality, and Fraternity. And as long as we believe in 
Equality, so long shall we grind mechanically till, like most 
Jews, we have no living soul, no living self, but only a super- 
machine faculty which will coin money. Then no doubt we 
shall all be satisfied, negative, anti-life. 

How dreary we are, putting up the social and political self 
as a first reality, dwindling the true self into a nothingness. 
So we all turn ourselves into ridiculous little political gramo- 
phones, all wound up and braying together, w^ithout a notion 
of the foolish and despicable sight we offer to the gods above. 
A man is either himself, or he is nothing. A braying little 
political gramophone is worse than nothing. We should teach 
our children a new prayer : " Dear God, let me not be 
wound up." 

Let every man get back to himself, and let the world at 
large sink down to its true perspective as the world at little, 
which it really is. Let every man learn to be himself, and in 
so being to give reverence and obedience where such is due, 
and to take command and authority where these are due. Let 
this be done spontaneously, from the living, real self. Other- 
wise we shall wind ourselves up till the spring breaks. 

And let us recognise secondarily that truth of duality or 
polarity which is within us and without us, and which makes 
of equality a mechanical round-about at the very outset. 
St. Francis falling down before the embarrassed and aston- 
ished peasant, what was he doing ? He was doing the same as 
FatHfer Zosimus, who falls down prostrate before Dmitri 
Karamazov. He, the spiritual saint, a creature of the one 
half, fell in recognition before the pure sensual being, the 
creature of the other half of life. Already, where is equality 
between beings established in such opposite mysteries, so 
utterly different both of them, but so utterly real ? 

But the duality is within us, as well as outside us. It is 
the duality of life itself, the polarity of the living. The social 
units such as Miss Effingham, impaled, whirl round on their 
pivot of negation like little machines, depolarised. When we 
depolarise ourselves we cease to live, as even St. Francis 
shows us. We must return to the great polarity of the life 

The tiger was a terrible problem to Shelley, who wanted 
life in terms of the lamb. I should think the lamb must have 


been a puzzler, say, to Sennacherib, who wanted life all in 
terms of the winged and burning lion. We must admit life in 
its duality. 

We must admit that only the juxtaposition of the tiger 
keeps the lamb a quivering, vivid, beautiful fleet thing. Take 
away the tiger and we get the sheep of our pasture, just clods 
of meat. If there were no hawks in the sky the larks would 
lose their song. It is the fanning of fear which makes the 
song flicker up, as well as the expansion of love. The soft, 
rolling sound of ^the dove among the leaves, her silken 
iridescence, depends on the hawk that hangs on sultry wings 
like a storm in bird-life. The one concentrates the other. 
From the soft, loving principle there is a tendency to expand 
into disintegrate formlessness. The sharp compulsion of the 
fierce sensual principle drives back the soul from its looseness, 
concentrates it into the jewel-isolation of a perfected self. 
Fear and suffering are great formative principles. 

The full eye of the deer or the rabbit or the horse would 
stagnate and lose its lustre, save for the keen, strange eye of 
the wolf and the weasel, and of man. The electric, almost 
magical, flash of a rabbit's mysterious passion depends 
entirely on the existence of the stoat. Destroy the mysterious 
circuit, teach the stoat to eat dandelion leaves, and life 
crumbles into dross and nullity. We must live in a world of 
perilous, pure freedom ,having always the tincture of fear, 
danger, and exultance. Nothing else will keep us living. As 
jewels are crushed between the valves of the earth, and driven, 
through unutterable resistance, into their own clear perfection, 
leaving the matrix exempt ; so must the human soul be purified 
in unspeakable resistance to the mass. We wear the ruby and 
the sapphire as symbols of our splendid pride in singleness, 
our jewel-like self. 

The Pyramid of Power 


By Major C. H. Douglas 

In the preceding article an attempt was made to show that the 
distinctive feature of the pre-war social structure was its 
tendency to the pyramid form in every phase of its activity; 
that this organisation carries with it a definite environment 
which develops the will-to-power; that the result of the 
war, with its opportunities for the concentration of power, had 
been to increase the probability of a determined attempt to 
consolidate the position, and so win a final victory for the 
principle of domination, benevolent or otherwise ; and that the 
permanent weapon in the hands of the exponents of the will- 
to-power was the economic ability to cut off the supply of the 
necessaries of life. Further, it was suggested that the design 
of the structure favoured the acquisition of authority by 
individuals unfitted both by temperament and training to 
exercise general authority other than in a specific interest, and 
as a consequence a strong decentralising influence was a 
growing factor in the world-wide situation. 

Now, strong and embittered differences of opinion 
resulting in some sort of conflict are nothing new in the history 
of civilisation; they recur with dreary monotony. The rela- 
tive merits of a York or a Lancaster, a Stuart or a Cromwell, 
a King George or a President Washington, have riven 
countries from top to bottom without resulting in the emer- 
gence of anything very new in outlook or environment. Such 
differences as were observable in the general conditions of 
life as between, say. Republican countries and Constitutional 
Monarchist England before the war, were, on the whole, only 
such differences as are inevitable as between peoples of 
varying temperament; the general outlook on life was com- 
petitive, and the economic structure was consequently 
pyramidal both internally as between individuals and exter- 
nally as between nationalities. For this reason no practical 
difficulty was or is involved in the dealings between such 



Governments other than those inherent in the system — the 
outlook was a common outlook and its code was not 
substantially dissimilar from the Law of the Jungle. 

But there is a definitely novel component in the present 
upheaval; apart from the magnitude of the front involved, 
the cleavage is in the main horizontal and the issue is 
impersonal. It is not a question of the substitution of Jones 
by Brown as chairman of the firm (a process which both Brown 
and Jones understand and of which in principle they approve, 
having " arrived " by that method), but of a liquidation and 
reconstruction in such a form that, under the new conditions, 
it is of much less consequence either to themselves or their 
neighbours what position they occupy — a proposition which 
rouses fundamental antagonisms. 

The stratification inherent in a society organised on a 
power basis places a definite limit on the possibility of 
rewarding any quality whatever which does not aim at power ; 
and it is, of course, obvious that positions of real power 
become fewer as the unification proceeds — that is to say, the 
power becomes focused at the apex of the pyramid. In 
consequence it becomes supremely important to the main- 
tenance of the system that its upper strata should be largely 
composed of persons temperamentally sympathetic to the 
will-to-power ; a selection process based on the possession of 
this temperament becomes progressively more important as 
the pyramid increases in size; and for this reason there is 
nothing in better general conditions to compensate our friends 
Brown and Jones for any change which reduces the 
opportunity of exercising and enhancing the will-to-power. 

The demand for decentralisation, which is the only threat 
to the achievement of the Perfect Servile World so accurately 
portrayed by Mr. Kipling in his story. As Easy as A. B.C. 
— a world in which any discussion likely to interfere with 
Traffic and all that it implies would be swiftly and eifectively 
closured with the aid of a Reconstructed Air Fleet armed with 
really effective weapons ; under the orders of a Central Board 
with the interests of Traffic-and-all-that-it-implies thoroughly 
at heart — has three roots : religious, economic, and political — 
all, of course, to some extent interconnected. 

While the first is very, possibly the most important because 
the most noumenal, it is only necessary for our purpose to 
indicate it as a conscious repudiation of priestcraft in any 
shape whatever. This feature is universal in all the widely 
varying forms taken by the attempts to embodv a practical 


decentralised Constitution — the Russian suffrage is withheld 
from priests, lunatics, and non-producers only, and the first 
effect of the revolution in Germany was to bring the Socialist 
proletariat into violent collision with the Roman Catholic 
Centre Party. There is an immediate reaction from this 
cause on education, and for practical purposes in this 
connection religion and education may quite fairly be 
bracketed together. 

The industrial aspect is complicated and at the same time 
fluid in the extreme. In this country the Trades Union 
official, whose organisation is generally moulded on that of 
Capital, is generally a Collective Socialist or simply a 
Progressive Reformer, and is apt to be a potential bureaucrat; 
while the shop steward of the Rank and File movement is 
either a Syndicalist or an advocate of National Guilds, which 
may be fairly considered as representing the British attempt 
at decentralising industry. Since all these various move- 
ments agree in attacking Capitalism, and it is at the moment 
almost the only point on which they do agree, it is fair to 
assume that Capitalism is in some danger. 

Now, that from the employment and' misuse of the 
Capitalistic system as an instrument of the will-to-power, 
proceed most of the economic and political evils from which 
we suffer is certain ; but in attacking it the Collective Socialist, 
at any rate, has completely missed the point that it is the 
concentrative tendency and not the private ownership as such 
which is the inherent danger, against which his universal 
panacea of nationalisation provides in itself no safeguard 

Prussianism, with its theories of the supreme state and the 
unimportance of the individual, is the absolute negation of 
private ownership and initiative, either in industry or else- 
where, which has in any case for practical purposes largely 
succumbed to the Trust. In these matters it is again of 
paramount importance to consider principles and not labels ; 
and the suspicious eagerness with which the reactionaries in \ 
every country are ready to support a Kerensky or an ■■ 
Erzberger if they cannot have a Romanoff or a Hohenzollern, \ 
should make us very careful in ensuring that after fighting I 
the greatest war of all history to make the world safe for * 
democracy, we do not tip out the baby with the bath-water 
and make democracy still more unsafe for the individual than 
it is at present. 

The situation is indicated with somewhat naive accuracy 


by the Morning Post in its issue of November 30th, 19 18, 
page 3, as follows : — 

"This . . . control of the Trade Unions and branches ought to be counter- 
acted by equall}' active and persistent groups of patriots within the Labour 

" But in order to do this, we have to get rid of the very common fallacy~\ 
that democratic bodies are subject to majority rule. You can make the con- | 
stitution as democratic as you please, but you cannot prevent government by\ 
the few. This is human nature " {Moirning Post's italics). :\^^^ 

It will not have escaped notice that the whole policy of the 
Reconstruction of Industry on the basis of the Whitley 
Report (which is, of course, a priori, capitalistic), is the crea- 
tion of a pyramidal Labour organisation in every industry to 
which the principle is so well expressed by the Morning Posfs 
correspondent can be applied. This Report has had a mixed 
reception, and it is mteresting to note that the greatest 
opposition has come from the Shop Steward movement, 
developed as an answer to the defects of older Trades 
Unionism ; and the apprehension with which this effort at 
decentralisation is regarded by the reactionary capitalist is 
based far more on a recognition of the difficulties such a 
scheme of organisation offers to successful corruption and 
capture than to any regard for the specific items in the policy 
it may for the moment represent, most of which have been 
previously parried with ease when presented through dele- 
gated Trades Union leaders whose positions of authority have 
been perforce achieved by exactly the methods best 
understood by those with whom they have to deal. 

As the Shop Steward movement is the most definite 
industrial recognition from the Labour side of the necessity 
for decentralisation, some examination of the general scheme 
is of interest. The actual details of the organisation vary 
from place to place, trade to trade, and even day to day ; but 
the essence of the idea consists in the adoption of a decen- 
tralised unit of production such as the " shop " or Department, 
and the substitution of actual workers in considerable 
numbers for the paid Trades Union Official as the nucleoli of 
both industrial and political power (although the political 
power is not exercised through Parliamentary channels). 

The shop steward is generally " Industrial " rather than 
"Craft" in interest; that is to say, he represents a body of 
men who produce an article rather than a section who perform 
one class of operation for widely different ends ; but there is 
nothing inherently antagonistic as between the two conceptions 


of function. He is quite limited in his sphere of action, but 
initiates general discussion on the basis of first-hand informa- 
tion, and forms a link between the decentralised industrial 
unit and other units which may be concerned. The practical 
effect of the arrangement is that the spokesmen are never out 
of touch with those for whom they speak, since the normal 
occupation and remuneration of representatives is similar to 
that of those they represent; and should any cleavage occur 
a change of representative can be easily secured. The official 
concerned has no executive authority whatever, nor can he 
take any action not supported by his co-workers, i.e., the 
direction of policy is from the bottom upwards instead of the 
top downwards. The individual shop stewards are banded 
together in a shop stewards' committee, which has again only 
just so much authority as the individual workers care to 
delegate to it. 

It is, of course, obvious that the permanent success of any 
arrangement of this character depends on a common recogni- 
tion amongst the individuals affected by the organisation of 
certain principles as " confirming standards of reference." 
In other words, it would be impossible to administer a 
complicated manufacturing concern on any such principles 
unless the general body of employees had a general 
appreciation of the fundamental necessities of the business, 
inclusive of direction and technical design. 

There is no doubt whatever that the idea provides the 
possibility of self-government without external pressure to an 
almost unlimited extent, and its similarity in principle to the 
Workmen's Councils, now appearing as a new feature in the 
political aspect, is obvious and rest$ on an appreciation of 
this point of view. 

Since it is becoming increasingly evident that economics 
and politics are only two aspects of the same problem, the 
success of the Shop Stewards movement will undoubtedly 
result in some form of greatly decentralised political adminis- 
tration along parallel lines. It is more difficult in these 
matters to separate the results of reactionary opposition and 
attack (to which all experiments dangerous to vested interests 
are subject) from results due to the actual conditions produced 
by them, and since it is quite unquestionable that every 
resource of autocracy, Trust-capitalism (as distinct from the 
individuals who happen to be capitalists), and, by no means 
least, international priest-craft, is concentrated in implacable 
opposition to the fundamental principle of decentralisation, 


whether applied to initiative or opinion, the exact practical 
effect of particular efforts to embody such a theory is hidden 
for the moment by the fog of war. 

It has been necessary to examine these movements 
without prejudice, because the senseless and dangerous mis- 
representation to which they are subject must quite inevitably 
have the most unfortunate results. In all of them there is a 
definite principle at work, and the policy referred to can only 
have the effect of embittering the inevitable struggle ; it will 
certainly not make a principle either more or less sound. 

One of the most deplorable effects of disingenuous 
propaganda is the quite undue stress which the movements 
against which it is directed tend to lay upon the moral claims 
of manual work — a situation which is a direct result of the 
attempt to mobilise intellectual forces against devolution of 
power. At this time there are two facts which are absolutely 
vital to any understanding of the world situation — the first, 
that the centre of gravit}^ is in the relation of economics to 
psychology; and the second, that the economic system as it 
exists at present has failed to assimilate machinery. Let us 
take the second point first. 

When it is considered that the real purchasing value of the ' 
work of one man for one hour (the man-hour expressed in i 
terms of food, clothing, and housing) is not one-fifth of what I 
it was in the fourteenth century, while the productive capacity | 
of the man-hour-machine probably now exceeds, on the I 
average, one hundred times the capacity of the simple man- | 
hour, it must surely be obvious that there is something very | 
wrong somewhere. It has already been pointed out in the 1 
Delusion of S^i-per-Production that production, -per se, is not { 
at fault; that misdirected effort and faulty distribution f 
have far more to answer for, and that faulty distribution is I 
inherent in our industrial and financial system as it stan(^s, I 
and will not be cured by increased industrial production | 
under the wagre system as we know it. 

The difficulty has its root in a fundamentally wrong 
conception of industry which, based on a flagrant defiance of 
the principles of the conservation of energy accepted in prac- 
tically every other sphere of knowledge as axiomatic, is 
reflected in finance. Finance states that "production " is the 
object of existence, and effort expended thus is profit -per se ; 
the physics and mechanics of industry prove quite simply that 
production is a charge against existence — a necessary charge 
— Hut one to be reduced by increased efficiency to the 


narrowest limits. (This argument has nothing whatever to 
do with the alleged moral effect of industry.) 

To realise this divorce between the facts of industrial 
process and the fiction of industrial accounting, consider a 
simple case such as the conversion of a bar of steel into, 
let us say, a screwed bolt. The steel bar enters the factory 
at a price we may call " A " ; wages to the value of " B " are 
expended on it, and a proportion of the general factory and 
administration charges, which we may call " C," are allocated 
against it. 

Its " factory cost " thus becomes A + B + C. A sum " D " 
is expended in selling it, and a profit " E " has to be made on 
the process, its price thus becoming A + B' + C + D + E. Now 
consider this process simply as a bill of quantities. We begin 
with "A"; a certain amount of "A" is deteriorated into 
shavings. The labour expended under " B " represents food 
eaten, clothes worn, houses built. " C " represents more 
human effort, electric or other power used (coal burnt), lubri- 
cant used, tools worn, and other indirect charges, while " D " 
and " E " represent more effort in units of a varying standard 
of value. The only thing actually left is "A" minus its 
shavings; and the actual measurable units of energy, very 
empirically indicated by " B," ;' C," " D," and "E," have 
been dissipated into forms in which they are not available for 
human use, and are the cost to the community of the trans- 
formation of "A" into a bolt, and, therefore, should be 
expressed as -B-C-D-E. The value depends entirely 
on the bolt's use, and is almost purely psychological. 

If it be contended that the bolt can be exchanged for 
bread, the answer is that such an exchange will not affect the 
units of energy required to make bread unless the bolt is 
used to increase the efRciency of bread-making. 

The financial process just discussed, therefore, clearly 
attaches a concrete money value to an abstract quality not 
proven, and as this money value must be represented some- 
where by currencv in the broadest sense, it forms a continuous 
and increasing diluent to the purchasing value of effort. 

Now, it has already Keen emphasised that at the moment 
economic questions are of paramount importance, because the 
economic svstem is the great weapon of the will-to-power. It 
will be obvious that if the economic problem could be reduced 
to a position of minor importance — in other words, if the 
productive power of machinery could be made effective in 
reducing to a very small fraction of the total man-hours 


available the man-hours required for adapting the world's 
natural resources to the highest requirements of humanity — 
the "deflation of the problem, would, to a very consider- 
able extent, be accomplished. The technical means 
are to our hands ; the good-will is by no means lacking ; and 
the opportunity is now with us. But it should be clearly 
recognised that mere reduction in the hours of work will not of 
itself provide the remedy if the machinery of remuneration is 
not modified profoundly. 

The other aspect of the problem, the overwhelming 
importance, at the moment, of the reaction of economics on 
psychology, is due to the attempt to fit economics into a 
system which can only make the individual the complete 
slave of environment. 

If any genuine attempt is made to extract a useful lesson 
from the history of human development, the conclusion is 
irresistible that the process is one long and, on the whole, 
continuously successful struggle to subdue environment, to 
the end that individuality. may have the utmost freedom. 
Now, by the operation, misunderstanding, and misuse of our 
financial and industrial system in its application to economics, 
we have created an economic position which is such a formid- 
able threat to the material existence of the individual that he 
is obliged to subordinate every consideration to an effort 
to cope with it. Partly by education and partly by what may 
be called instinct, it is increasingly understood that mis- 
directed effort and unsound distributing arrangements, while 
operating to minister to the will-to-power, are entirely respon- 
sible for the position in which we find ourselves. 

The practical issue at this time, therefore, is not at all 
whether this condition is to continue — it is simply one regard- 
ing the number of experiments, all very probably involving 
great general discomfort, which we are to endure until the 
inevitable rearrangement in alignment with the purpose of 
evolution is satisfactorily accomplished. And the suppres- 
sion and perversion of the facts, on which alone sound 
constructive effort can be based, can have but one result — to 
increase the number of these experiments and the discomfort 
of the process. 

Two and Two 

By Bart Kennedy 

It is said that two and two make four, and that four and four 
make eight, and that a circle is round, and that a square has 
four corners. These facts are put forward as steel-bound, 
copper-bottomed axioms against which there is no appeal. 
Compared with them the laws of the Medes and Persians 
are, or were, but quantities of the most variable order. They 
are as immutable as gravitation, or the income-tax. There 
is no appeal against them. None may escape them. 

These facts, or axioms, or whatever you like to call them, 
were invented by wise men who came to the conclusion that 
it was just as well for man to have something that he could 
swear by. The coming into a world — that they of necessity 
could no more understand than a mite understands the round 
of cheese wherein it lives — puzzled them and upset their 
dignity. And so they invented these cocksure things that 
men have been swearing by ever since. 

Whether two and two really and absolutely make four or 
not is too deep a riddle for me. I suppose that they do, for 
I have always been told so. I have always been told that 
a circle is round, and that a square has four corners. But 
I am unable to put my hand upon my heart and answer for 
the utter and absolute verity of what I've been told. That 
there is such" a thinsf as an income-tax I can absolutely vouch 
for. For the tax-extractor has only this very morning sent 
me a letter to the effect that he will summon me if I don't 
pay up at once. 

I know I ought not to say what I am going to say, for 
it savours of disrespect towards those ancient and time- 
honoured persons who invented this two-and-two business. 
But say it I must. Often, when I am having a quiet think 
all by myself, I wonder if these two numerals do really 
make four. I admit that the w^eight of the evidence is in 
favour of their doing so. But, on the other hand, I see 
things that make me -doubt the unassailability of this axiom 
that is apparently so self-evident. 

When I think of my dear good old friend, man, and his 
humorous little ways, I am often tempted to think that two 
and two, instead of making four, make seven, or seventeen, 
or any number you like. It makes me think that my dear 
good old friend's regard for numerals is at best but academic. 
He regards them as little as a gale of wind would regard a 
feather. That two and two make four is all right for other 


people. But for him — no, very much no ! He plays all 
manner of pranks witli them. He turns them into combina- 
tions that would make their inventors turn in their graves, 
if they but knew. 

For example, he will preach in a loud, stentorian voice 
that honesty- is the best policy, and at the same time he will 
pinch — to use a rude, slang verb — everything he can lay his 
hands on. He will tell you that if you won't work, neither 
shall you eat — and he will tell it you in the face of the glaring 
fact that it is the people who don't work who get the best and 
the most plentiful supply of food, He will tell you that 
you must wait till you get to a higher world before you can 
have your good time, whilst he has his good time here in 
this vulgar world below. In fact, our dear good old friend, 
man, is — when he possibly can manage it — a living negation 
of the mathematical axiom that two and two make four. 

I do not grumble at him, for be is a good fellow. Indeed, 
he is the best fellow we know. But his attitude towards this 
axiom is most humorous. 

Whether or not the other animals have invented axioms, 
that they treat in this free and easy manner, it is not for me 
to say. I leave myself, concerning this, in the hands of the 
men who have spent years in their society, studying them. 
But I take it as read that the ants have axioms saddled upon 
them even as we have. And I also take it as read that the 
busy bees are inflicted in a like manner. These animals — or, 
rather, insects — doubtless had in the beginning their geniuses 
who knew it all. There must have been ants and bees with 
bulgy foreheads, or the equivalent of bulgy foreheads, who 
formulated plans and philosophies for the bees and ants to 

Whether the ants and bees, and the rest of the insects 
and animals, are as strict in the following of the lines laid 
down by their geniuses of the past as men are, I don't know. 
And I must remark here that if the men who studied them 
knew, they have forgotten to put their knowledge into their 

Personally, my opinion is that all the animals, from the 
invisible microbe to the obvious elephant, have a tenderer 
regard for mathematical truths than man has. If they 
believe a thing, they usually stick to it. I can't buttress up 
this statement with absolute proof. I only put it forward 
as a mere personal opinion of my own. According to this 
opinion of mine, the woU, and the bear, and the birds, and 
the fishes, and the rest of them, go along lines that don't 


deviate. What is good enough for the crowd generally is 
good enough for them. They seem to stick closer than a 
burr to whatever rules or axioms they may possess. If the 
wolf won't hunt, the wolf gets nothing to eat. He must help 
with the others in the getting in of the provisions. If he 
doesn't, he is lucky indeed if he gets off with only the cold 
shoulder. Usually if he won't work, he himself becomes 
provender. Of course, I don't know all the other rules that 
the wolves have to guide them in their path through life. I 
speak as one who is on the outside. But I wouldn't mind 
laying a pound to a penny that their two and two is very 
much four. What the birds and the fishes and the rest of 
them do I am not quite in a position to say. But I wouldn't 
mind laying the same odds that they have just as close a 
regard for what are termed mathematical truths. 

It seems as if it were only our dear good old friend man 
— bless him ! — who queries the absoluteness of these steel- 
bound, copper-bottomed axioms. And I am bound to say 
that, in my humble opinion, he shows his intellect in so 
doing. He is intelligent enough to realise — in practice, any- 
way — that he lives in a world where all the lines are in- 
definite, despite what the mathematicians say. His regard 
for these wise, know-all persons is mere lip-regard. He 
listens to them with politeness, but he goes on his own 
devious, mixed-up, contradictory way. 

Now let us look at the matter straight ! Do two and two 
really make four? Do four and four really make eight? 
Is a circle really round? And has a square really four 
corners ? 

I hear an emphatic " Yes ! " in answer to these questions. 

But if that be so, then why is it that man makes hay, 
whenever he can, of the inviolability of these axioms? Why 
won't he admit them for himself even as he admits them for 
others? Why does he, whenever possible, manufacture 
individual axioms for his own personal consumption? 

Can it — oh, can it be possible that these axioms don't 
really fit? Are the numerals, and the squares, and the 
circles, and the triangles, and other like things, but arbitrary 
gauges that have been made for the impossible task for 
measuring what can't be measured? And does man prove 
his superiority to the simpler and more innocent animals by 
refusing to accept them — whenever he gets the chance? Is 
this instinct of rebellion the secret of his domination over 
all things? 

I wonder. 

The Garb of Peace 

By H. Dennis Bradley 

As I prefer to look upon myself as an altruistic optimist I like 
to think that the Millennium is at hand. 

For if one-thousandth of the forecasts one hears on every 
side only come partially true, the Millennium is going to be an 
awfully exciting adventure. Heaven alone knows what it 
is not going to include; from pure milk to standing armies; 
from electoral reform to real beer; from self-sacrificing public 
men to standard boots. According to some perfervid enthu- 
siasts, the Millennium at whose threshold we stand typifies the 
simultaneous Revivals of Learning, Wit, Art, Beauty, and 

It is a large order. 

Let us proportion the task to our strength ; let us deal with 
one Millennium at a time. ' 

Why not consider Clothes from the point of view of the 
coming Millennium? 

First, and foremost, we have a horrible legacy to make 
away with — a legacy which fettered our limbs, stultified our 
minds, warped our characters, poisoned our intellects, and 
ruined our naturally sunny natures — the Great Dress 
Tradition, bequeathed to us by our deplorable Victorian 

Times and tastes change, no doubt. It is, perhaps, hardly 
possible now to imagine the state of civilisation in which an 
emerald-green crinoline, a lurid shawl, a poke-bonnet, and an 
elastic-sided boot were accounted Beauty's perfect setting; 
when massive whiskers, endless chains, and shapeless rags 
tortured into a faint semblance of clothing was your only 
Romeo wear; but it is not a state of civilisation to waste 
regrets over. 

Worse still, our egregious ancestors, under whose yoke we 
have groaned for precious generations, and whose influence 
was faintly felt down to the very outbreak of war, in some 
inexplicable manner always contrived to tangle up the lesser 
moralities with ugly clothes. Ugliness breathed virtue, they 


were wont to assert, so on with the pads, the " bustles," the 
"improvers"; let the whiskers flourish, and hide, hide the 
sinful human form ! And yet they do not seem to have been 
wholly successful. Does not one of their classic bards 
complain in deathless verse : — 

" Clothes make the man ; yet to a large extent 
This world is still deceived by ornament." 

And small blame to the world, when "ornament," male 
and female, comprised stout horse-hair pads. 

Small wonder that the Victorian sun set in a welter of 
immorality and humbug. 

But before the war there were signs of a pleasantly 
peaceful Millennium in clothes. Men began to consider their 

You see, clothes have an importance in the scheme of 
things. For one thing they are necessary. 

And necessary, not, as our deplorable Victorians seemed 
to imagine, for the sole purpose of swaddling the human form 
in an unrecognisable bundle, of hiding every possible likeness 
to the Godhead, of concealing not only sex, but humanity, and 
of destroying every possible form of self-satisfaction, but for 
the purposes both of a fence against cold and of a perfectly 
legitimate decoration — a. decoration which is an aid to one's 
far too anaemic self-esteem, and a help to one's sometimes 
sordid surroundings. 


The season of 19 13 had been remarkable for a mild 
revolution against the dreary old Victorian conventions, which 
bound the male to drabs and greys, and men, whose only sacri- 
fice to colour had been a tie, a sock, or gorgeous suit of 
pyjamas, revelled in the dawning change and commenced to 
indulge in their secret heart's desire. 

For long women had clothed themselves as tulips, and 
men, surveying the animal creation wherein the male invari- 
ably lords it in the most splendid robe, began to think, and 
after thinking to assert their right to colour. 

"Why," asketh the man, "should the gorgeous golden 
cock pheasant outshine the demure hen, the glittering peacock 
shame his spouse into her proper station, the lordly male tiger 
outblare his tender tigress, and man alone slink behind his 
mate in dirty drab and undistinguished, offensive neutrality? " 

It had not always been so. 


In olden days, days of a real equality of the sexeSj the 
beaux, if they did not outshine the belles, met them on equal 
terms, and displayed an equal taste ; the dandies paced stately 
through their world safe in the consciousness that they too 
filled a picture not unworthily. But there came that appalling 
.Victorian reaction; men and women made of themselves 
shapeless bundles, and the men passively accepted and 
retained the mode, elevating it with a tradition. 

Woman, of course, with her nimble, irritable brain, 

And in 19 13 man had begun his mild revolt — and war 
came, and the ironic gods doomed him to a muddy uniformity 
of khaki. 

n • K i i *■ « 

But he had made discoveries. 

He had discovered that men's " fashions " — it is a beastly 
phrase, I know; but what other is there? — had stagnated 
under the later Hanoverian and Coburg influences. 

He had also discovered that, after all, a man can exchange 
darkness for light, and feel unashamed ; that colour in dress is 
pleasant to gaze upon, and that most men look and feel rather 
the better for it. 

In spite of all this, it would, however, have been long 
before the ordinary, tradition-hampered man would have 
dared on his own initiative to blossom like the lilac or the 
rhododendron. Man, as a whole, is a timid beast, sartorially, 
and feels himself lamentably untrained. A few nervous 
excursions into waistcoats, which usually ended in the mildest 
of greys and fawns ; a tie or two which suggested that some- 
where in the world there was such a thing as sunshine and 
colour ; a faint expression of a hope of better times in store in 
his scarce-seen hosiery — these were the limits of his personal 
courage in adventuring on new seas. 

But these timid venturings were not unseen; others 
realised that if he were only guided discreetly, and if his taste 
were nursed until it was matured and strong, the ordinary 
man was quite capable of bearing himself bravely in other 
shades than black and grey, and would most certainly feel 
and look the better for the change. 

Obviously, the first step was to procure materials which 
would appeal to the pupil's too long suppressed sense of the 
beautiful, and designs which would not startle his half- 
formed taste. Therefore manufacturers were approached 
and instructed to provide for the steps towards an improved 



mode, towards a Clothes Millennium, cleverly subdued blend- 
ings of rich and subtle colours. The result was all that was to 
be desired. The ordinary man did not realise that he was 
walking the dusty pavement literally in purple and gold. 

He began to find, too, as his taste began to awaken, that 
there was an opportunity for individualism in his attire which 
pleased him. To be able to call for a mixture of russet 
brown and peacock blue, indigo and purple, or pheasant and 
violet, and to be conscious that there would be nothing in the 
finished garment to make horses shy or passers-by stare 
tickled his pride, flattered his nascent artistic sense, and he 
began to adopt the "Movement" with confidence. 

Then War came, and the world of drab and mud. 

But why, having revolted, having struggled to cut himself 
free, should he return to the rules and regulations of the 
Victorian conventions of dullness and horror which he was 
casting off with joyous relief? 

There was nothing admirable in them. 

Ugliness is not morality; shapelessness is not always 
chastity; lack of self-respect does not necessarily indi- 
cate uprightness, and contempt for appearances does not 
inevitably imply master-mind. 

Besides, there are the feelings of others to be considered. 

Now that the old orders have changed, the old Bastilles 
have toppled in dishonoured ruins, the old absurd tyrannies 
have been flung contemptuously from their pinchbeck 
thrones; now that men, with awakened vision, with new ideas 
and untrammelled minds, are seeking to construct a new 
future, do not let us clog our bodies with an environment 
which stifled us for too long. 

We may not go back to the rainbow shades and wonderful 
stuffs of the bucks and the dandies of olden time — do what we 
will, we live in utilitarian days — but whatever comes do not 
let us revert to the hideous hues and shapelessness of the 
Victorian era. 

As we must wear clothes, let us at least wear clothes that 
give us and our beholders pleasure, and which, at the very 
least, do not depress us all. 

But as I look forward into the Millennium I see many 
sordid difficulties before us — difficulties which are very near 
at hand, and which threaten to be very serious. 

For to have clothes, of whatever kind, you must have 
cloth, and for five years the manufacturers have been pre- 


vented by war from developing the production of the 
materials out of which will be made the clothes of the future, 
and a year at least will elapse before they can again be 

It is well to bear this in mind. The finest cloth in the 
world is manufactured in Great Britain, and it represents one 
of this country's greatest and most important industries. On 
the face of it, therefore, it is essential to the welfare of the 
country that the policy of the producers should be progressive 
and unhampered; least of all should it be stagnant. 
Stagnation has been one of the evils of war. 

But there is another and a graver problem to be faced with 
regard to the garb of peace — that of its price. 

As things stand at the moment, owing to the shortage of 
material, the cost of labour, living, and a thousand-and-one 
increases in price brought about by war, the ordinary lounge 
suit, which in 19 14 cost £8 Ss., costs to-day between £14 14s. 
and ;^i6 i6s., and even then it must be remembered men's 
clothes have not gone up in the same proportion as other 
necessaries, from bananas to whisky, from boots to beer. 

But the increase is grave, and the position for the profes- 
sional man — the man with the limited income — is serious. 
His tailor's bill of £30 a year or so, on which he contrived to 
clothe himself decently in good materials, is at once doubled, 
and his income, if it has remained at its pre-war figure, only 
possesses half its old purchasing value. Which is he to do? 

It will go sadly against the grain for him to descend to 
shoddy ready-made suits, to lose his individuality, self- 
respect, and appear slovenly and down-at-heel — and is like 
to affect his progress. 

And I fear that it will be at least a year before prices can 
possibly begin to come lower, for on the declaration of peace 
the demands of the export trade will be enormous. 

For years the Central Powers have neither been producing 
nor importing materials; our Allies also are woefully short, 
and the strain on our resources, which are none too great at 
present for our own needs, will be very great. In Germany 
and Austria men's suits cost £50 or more, and in other 
countries the prices are far in excess of the prices here. 

Therefore, when peace is restored and the world once 
more begins to trade, the demands for clothing material will 
be gigantic, and, as prices are controlled by supply and 
demand, the present level of prices will be maintained for a 

F 2 


lengthy period—even if it is not raised, which is by no means 
improbable. And it will be many years before a pre-war 
level is attained — if ever. 

a 5 s 'i - 'i « •■ 

The problem for the demobilised officer is an acute one, 
more especially if his figure has altered materially by training 
and his old civilian kit is of little use to him. 

At the present time a good and comprehensive civilian 
outfit will cost him at the very least £ioo, and there must be 
tens of thousands of demobilised men of the professional and 
business classes to whom a good civilian outfit is an absolute 

These men were allowed ^50 towards the outfit in which 
they went out to fight for their country; the least their country 
can do is to allow them part of £50 to equip them for the 
individual battle of life which now confronts them. 

These men are returning home in high spirits. It is a 
curious fact that, despite the season of the year and the 
increased prices, they order the lightest and most cheerful 
materials they can find; it is a natural expression of their 
feelings. These are the men on whose energies the future of 
the nation depends; they must not be handicapped in the 
struggle from the very commencement. 

But, thank heaven ! the prices of men's clothes are never 
likely to rival women's; and men's clothes have one great 
virtue — that of durability. 

So a drastic and not unhealthy change will come about in 
the household of moderate incomes, an approximation to the 
real equality of the sexes; the man will spend more on his 
adornment, and the woman, of necessity, less. Before the 
war, where the woman spent four or five times as much on 
clothes as a man, she will in future have to content herself 
with twice as much, and the world will be a happier and 
more wholesome spot — if the assumption be true that women 
dress to annoy other women and to please other w^omen's 

But whatever problems the immediate future presents, 
never let us lose the vantage we have gained dver the Ghouls 
of Ugliness and Drabness ; never let us forget that we have 
discovered Colour and Beauty and have begun to realise their 
utility in a utilitarian age. 

The Two Lovers 

By Gerald Cumberland 

The blossom of the lilac-tree gave a pulp-like sound as 
it thwacked against her window, and curiously-named 
Stephanie Miniati smiled to herself as she turned over in her 
bed and, placing a hand on her rounded breast, closed her 
eyes in order that she might see Orosdi. For Orosdi dwelt 
not only in her heart, but his big, black eyes burned in her 
brain and lit it, and his sinewy hands were ever about her 
throat in love-cruelty. She closed her eyes, and, in imagina- 
tion, summoned him to her chamber. He came : not 
hurriedly, as an anxious lover moves, but with long, lazy 
strides, his baby-face all smiles, his selfish, rounded chin 
thrust a little forward. He stood by her side, and then, in 
imagination, she made him suddenly bend down and kiss her 

She sighed in a luxury of love, and " Or-os-di ! 
Or-os-di ! " she murmured. And she thought for the 
thousandth time : " I am the most beautiful girl in Aivatli, and 
Orosdi is the most handsome lad of all who walk on the Plain 
of Langaza." 

But as yet she was only half awake, and in her semi- 
consciousness had forgotten her other lover who now lay in 
the Church Cemetery on the high land above Aivatli. 

The noise of the sheep and the goats herding down the 
uneven street brought her to full consciousness, and, sitting up 
in bed, the smile slowly died from her face, a scowl, almost 
a snarl, taking its place. For she had remembered that to-day 
was the anniversary of the death of her other lover, and that, 
though Orosdi had made the thought of her dead sweetheart 
sometimes hateful, yet fear of her neighbours would, she 
knew, compel her to weep and pray at his grave and fondle 
the bones that had once been covered with stubborn flesh. 
She sat and scowled ; then, suddenly taking up a mirror that 
lay on a chair by her side, she smiled entrancingly at her 
reflection. She pulled back her lips and looked at her white 
teeth; she bared her breasts and, holding the mirror below 
them, looked at and admired the twin curves reflected 


therein; then, making slits of her eyes, she looked from the 
corners of her eyelids — looked roguishly, with invitation in 
her glance. 

" Oh, you dear creature ! " she said; " how good of you to 
be so beautiful." 

All morning she was at work in the fields whilst her wifeless 
father sat drinking cognac in the village. She herself loved 
wine, but when with Orosdi drank only mavrodaphne, the 
"black holly" that makes lovers more ardent and leaves no 
sting behind. The plain, covered with vineyards and 
mustard and poppies, blazed in triumph. Banked roadways, 
infrequently used, v/ere covered with multitudinous flowers — 
flowers that were warm to the touch and almost sickly with the 
sun's day-long kiss. Stephanie, stooping over her work, 
wiped away with the back of her hand the drops of perspira- 
tion that stood gleaming on her forehead. The heat did not 
trouble her : she loved it, for her strength was that of an 
animal. The sun, the flowers, and the call of cuckoos made 
Heaven for her, and she raised her Heaven to the utmost 
pitch of sublimity whenever she looked at Langaza, white 
among^ green poplars, where her lover lived. 

" How white it is ! " she said to herself ; and then some- 
thing in her brain whispered : " How white they will he! 
How white they will he to-7iight, in so few hours! " 

She caught her breath and bit her underlip. Her cheeks 
paled. "What do I mean? What do I mean?" she asked 
herself hurriedly. But only too well did she know what she 
meant. Her brain was thinking of her dead lover's bones, 
which to-night would lie in her hands — bones that, washed in 
wine a year ago, had been placed back in his shallow grave at 
Aivatli as white as the cambric that comes from England. 
Her religion, her loyaltv, her dead love — everything that 
demanded her acquiescence in the customs of her race — 
meant nothino- to her : but the opinion of her neighbours 
meant everything. People in small villages can be very 
cruel. " Oh ! yes ! " exclaimed Stephanie, pitying herself, 
"thev would be cruel. Father, most of all." 

With a resolute gesture she turned from Langaza and bent 
over her work. How wonderfully decisive and final is the 
thrust with which the diabolically selfish can rid themselves 
of uncomfortable thoug-hts ! With an "Oh! I'll go through 
with it ! " she put the little grave aside, forgetting the dead 
vouth's dear kisses that, four years ago, used to run from her 
brow to her eves, from her eves to her mouth, from her mouth 


to her breasts, where they used to cling and turn her girlhood 
to maidenhood. 

At midday she stopped her work and, seated on a high 
bank, ate bread and olives and drank a little of the wine of 
Samos. I think I can show her to you. The bank is covered 
with high grass and tall flowers — such flowers as you will see 
in England any real June. So, of course, she is half-hidden 
in a little swimming mist of colour of blue and yellow and 
green. Her skirt is pulled above her knees, and you can see 
the thick woollen stockings that do not conceal her long, 
beautiful ankles. Her dark face is both sallow and red, her 
hair black, her bosom — you can see it, for her blouse is 
opened two buttons at the neck — whiter than the paper on 
which this little history is printed. She wears no hat, and her 
blouse is a dusky red, the colour of her cheeks. Her eyes are 
pits of darkness, in each of which a little light burns brightly, 
almost feverishly. An animal, of course. But a beautiful 
animal, with a beauty that not one woman in a thousand 
Greek women possesses. But is she Greek? She says so. 
But is she? Some lusty Bulgar, perchance, raped her 
grandmother; or a Turk, insinuating and cruel, crept to the 
bed of some maternal ancestor. 

But she has finished her little meal. . . . 

She lay on her back, the sun smiting her — the sun of 
Greece, that two thousand years ago sm.ote men to greatness, 
that burned men and melted them and recast them as athletes, 
poets, orators, sculptors, writers of dramas. She turned over 
on her side, murmuring something and pressing her lips to 
the ground with a smile. 

Orosdi was drinking at Langaza. He was sleek and lazy, 
but his brain was bright, and he was now busy purchasing two 
mules from his father. For Orosdi had a farm of his own 
and prospered, as all physically lazy men may prosper if 
their brains are deep and cunning and if they retain the accu- 
mulated wisdom of their ancestors. 

" Ninety-five drachmas," said Orosdi, placing his plump 
hand on the thin, vein-corded hand of his father. 

The elder man smiled. 

"You are the son of my father," he said, enigmatically. 
Then he added, reminiscently : " He always began with half 
the price he was willing to pay. We will talk of this 


" No, no. It is pleasant here. Let us finish the business 

He turned aside and called to the keeper of the inn outside 
which they were sitting. A dirty creature limped from the 
dark interior to the doorway. 

" You have my bottle of whisky there, is it not so ? Well, 
open it. And bring two clean glasses." 

His father started a little. 

" 'Tis an old trick," said he. " You would make me drunk 
and then buy from me.'* I would rather give you the mules 
than that you should do that." 

" Father, I bought the whisky for you because . . . 
because . . . well, you know why." He looked affection- 
ately at his parent. 

The old man, gazing at his handsome son, felt his eyes 
becoming moist. An impulse overswept him. 

" You were always a good son to me," he said ; " let me 
give you the mules." 

" Father ! " 

" Well, after all, I'm at the end of my life, and you , . . 
you know, Orosdi . . . hut do you know?" 

" Father, father ! " 

But the dirty innkeeper interrupted the conversation by 
putting the whisky bottle and two glasses on the table. 

" Come, let us drink," said Orosdi, pouring out the drink 
and feeling a little uncomfortable. 

They drank the spirit neat, and almost immediately the 
old man's worn face became flushed and alive. 

" Well, they are yours," he said ; " I will bring them to you 

His son rose and kissed him on the cheek. 

" What can I give you in return? " he asked. 

His father sat silent for a minute, twisting his fingers 
under the edge of the table and looking on the ground. He 
darted a shy glance at the young man. 

" I would like only one thing," said he. 

" It is yours." 

" I would like you to come. . . . But perhaps you have 
already arranged. ... If you were to come and sit with me 
to-night I should be very happy." 

Orosdi's jaw sank and his face clouded. 

" To-morrow, father," said he. " Of course I will come. 
But to-night I go to Aivatli." 

The old man poured out more whisky and drank it 



greedily. He sighed, and began again to twist his fingers 
under the edge of the table. 

" Not to-night, then," he murmured, with resignation. 

" But why especially to-night.? " urged Orosdi. 

" Have you forgotten ? It is my birthday." 

" Blast ! . . . Yes, father, of course I will come. I will 
come three hours — two hours — after sunset. I thought of 
your birthday yesterday : you were a good deal in my 
thoughts. . . . But to-day! But you know me, father. I 
am like that. I have always been so. But you do know, 
father, don't you, that no one comes before you in my love ? " 

" You see, my son, I am old. To-day I am seventy-three. 
And it seems to me that the nearer I get to the grave the 
more lonely I become. Sometimes I wish that we lived 
together. ... I think that if we lived together . . . ." 

" Oh, but father ! — it was you who urged me to strike out 
for myself ... to do what I could without hindrance — that 
is how you put it, father : you called yourself a hindrance." 

" Did I ? " questioned the old man, dully. " I forget. 
You may be right." 

" Come and live with me, father," said Orosdi, impulsively. 
" You can sell your bit of land. . . ." 

" No," interrupted the old man, rather proudly, " no, 
Orosdi. This is a moment of weakness. I do not always 
feel as I do now. You must go your way, I mine." 

He poured out more whisky and drank it. 

"And now, Orosdi," said he, looking at the half-empty 
bottle, " I think I will go home." 

" And I will go with you to your door. You must take the 
whisky with you." 

Orosdi re-corked the bottle and put it in his father's hands. 

They rose and walked together through the village until 
they reached its outskirts, where, coming upon a detached 
house where the old man lived, they parted, the old man 
closing the door behind him. The room into which he 
stepped from the street was large but badly lit; it smelt 
stuffily of leeks. Lurching across the tiled floor, he reached a 
little stool, on which he sat, his hands clasped in front of him, 
his head bent low. His lips moved, and he trembled with the 
ague of age. 

Presently, feeling Intolerably tired, he rose and shambled 
to a rug lying in a corner. Casting himself upon this, he was 
soon asleep ; dreams came trooping to him, dreams of hatred 
of Stephanie Miniati, who was taking his dear son from him. 


How he loved Orosdi of the lazy -smile — Orosdi, whose shoul- 
ders were so strong — Orosdi, who could be as tender as a 
woman, and as forgetful ! 

The sun had already set when Orosdi went forth from 
Langaza to see his love at Aivatli, and he pulled his body 
together sensually as he trod the long, white road. Frogs 
splashed and croaked in the ditches and ponds, nightingales 
sang, a big moon stared. But he cared for none of these 
things. The world to him was one woman — a woman whose 
kisses were fierce and whose clasp would not let him go. 

His mood was a little bitter and cruel. Stephanie had 
played with him too long. She would not marry him and she 
would not . . . What was the use of a love like that? It 
was not that she was virtuous : she was simply afraid. After 
all, why shouldn't she marry him ? Her old lover had been 
dead these years, and there was no reason for her ridiculous 
clinging to his memory. 

But to-night he would bring the business of his passionate 
courting to a head. The thing was wearing him out. His 
robust body was failing him. To clasp and kiss . . . 
to clasp and kiss and never really love ! That was 
children's play. 

He quickened his pace and passed through the outskirts of 
Aivatli. The crooked village was full of black shadows, and 
even to him, who was familiar with them, the twisting, inconse- 
quent streets were like a maze; nevertheless, Orosdi could 
without difficulty have found his way blindfolded to 
Stephanie's house. His nearest way there lay past the central 
inn, outside which many men were sitting, drinking. For a 
moment the young farmer hesitated ; then, calling for a bottle 
of mavrodaphne, he flung himself down in a chair and peered 
round him to see if he could discover the face of Stephanie's 
father by the light of the one lamp that hung outside the inn. 
Several acquaintances greeted him ; he replied to them curtly, 
almost insolently. Miniati was away, they told him. He 
had set out for Seres in the afternoon and would not return 
for nearly a week. 

He grunted his satisfaction, uncorked his bottle, poured 
out a glass of wine, and slowly drank the sweet intoxicant. 
Almost at once he felt its stimulating effect : it fired him and 
his passion and, with a gesture of impatience, he rose and 
made his way to Stephanie's house. Having arrived there, 


he knocked, but there was no reply. He tapped with a stick 
on the high window, but no one came. 

" Blast ! " he murmured. 

" And don't you know where she is ? " asked a voice 
behind him. 

He turned to see a wrinkled old woman who was bent 
almost at right angles over a stick that supported her. 

" No," he answered, impatiently; "where is she? " 

*' Where should she be to-night if not with my grandson? " 

He remembered. The old woman was the grandmother 
of Stephanie's dead Mercury, and the girl herself would be in 
the cemetery with the boy's bones. He kicked at a stone 
angrily, and, turning on his heel, walked past the church to 
the graveyard above. At the open iron gate he paused and 
looked about him. Not a soul was to be seen. Going down 
on his hands and knees he crept behind the diminutive 
gravestones until he came to within a few yards of the grave 
he sought, where he lay prone, scarcely breathing, his eyes 
hard and glittering, his upper jaw closed anxiously over 
his lower lip. He could see his girl. She knelt at a very 
shallow, open grave; touching her knees was a heap of 
disordered bones ; a white skull, small and boyish, reflected 
the moonlight. 

But Stephanie was not looking at what remained of her 
Mercury; she was gazing into space with unseeing eyes, her 
arms by her side, her body held loosely, dejection in every 
line of her figure. She stirred once or twice uneasily, as 
though half aware of Orosdi's presence. 

He, cunning and alert, watched for his opportunity. A 
mood of disgust might presently come to her. Or she might 
melt in tenderness at thoughts of him. . . . 

There was a wind in the trees, and in the air the scent of 
lilac. Orosdi heard the wind and smelt the lilac. The earth 
gave forth the warmth of the day's sun ; it excited him, and his 
teeth bit more deeply into his lower lip. His Stephanie 
looked cool and fresh in her white robe. 

Less than a dozen yards away, peering over the wall, was 
an old man whose lips moved angrily. But he was patient in 
his anger, for he was afraid of his son. He felt himself to 
be futile, and it was deep misery to be standing here and 
watching Orosdi worshipping that handsome and destructive 
Greek girl, still he must remain. The whisky he had drunk 

F* 2 


earlier in the day twisted things out of focus. He would do 
nothing; he would only watch. He would learn the worst. 

After a very long time he saw Orosdi crouch like a cat and 
crawl like a snake. He saw him glide behind Stephanie, rise 
to his feet and approach her till he stood above her, holding 
out his arms. 

And then a violent thing happened. Orosdi, having stood 
irresolute a moment, suddenly turned to his lover's side, 
kicked away the bones that lay at her knees, threw his arms 
around the girl's body, lifted her from the ground, and carried 
her away to the shadow of the little stone building in which, 
ranged in sacks, lay the bones of Aivatli's dead. There was 
no sound save a small, hysterical laugh of joy from the girl. 
The old man heard them sighing in the shadow, and, like a 
knife, the thought of his own honeymoon stabbed his soul. 
He muttered rapidly to himself and frowned. Then, labori- 
ously pulling himself over the wall, he walked rapidly to the 
graveside, gathered the scattered bones together, and replaced 
them in the shallow grave. He did this quickly but tidily, 
feeling his decency shocked, and feeling, as he had never felt 
before, that his son was a stranger to him. He filled up the 
grave with earth and smoothed the surface with the palms of 
his hands. And then, with a frightened prayer, he rose to his 
feet, made his way to the wall, and clambered over. On the 
far side he stopped to listen a moment. But no sound 
reached him : the lovers were quiet in their bliss. 

It was nearly midnig*ht when they rose, and all the 
guardian semi-wild dogs of Aivatli seemed to be barking 
together. Orosdi was full of quiet happiness. Stephanie 
had given herself to him and had promised herself in marriage. 
He placed his arm round her and began to lead her towards 
the iron gate of the cemetery. But, very gently, she put him 
away, saying : 

" Leave me alone. I will see you to-morrow." 

" No ! " he insisted. " You are mine now. What does it 
matter who sees us ? " 

" But you forget," she protested. And as he did not 
appear to know what he had forgotten, she added : " You 
forget what we are leaving behind. I must put him away 

She walked towards the grave, he by her side. Simulta- 
neously, on emerging from behind a tree, they discovered that 
the bones had disappeared, that the grave had been refilled, 


and that the earth above it was smooth and tidy. They 
stopped, and her hand sought his. He put his arms about 
her protectingly, though his fear equalled her own. 

" He has gone back ! " she muttered, awestruck. And she 
stood gazing at the grave as though hypnotised. 

" Come away," he said, trembling ; " he may return." 

Without another word they turned and, panic-stricken, 
rushed from the cemetery. At her house-door they stopped. 

"What does it mean?" he asked. 

" It means he no longer loves me. You kicked him. You 
kicked my Mercury, who was always so good to me." 

She looked at him wild-eyed, accusingly. 

Without an embrace she opened the door and entered the 
house, leaving him alone. 

The old man was lying on his rug when his son entered. 
He had finished the bottle of whisky, and he knew not what 
his own mood was. 

" It was my birthday yesterday," he said, aggressively, 
" and you did not come, though you promised." 

He protruded his underlip and, taking an empty glass that 
stood near him where he lay on the floor, he cast it on the tiles, 
where it was smashed to fragments. 

Orosdi, weary and a little afraid of what the night had 
brought him, sat down and sighed. 

*' Do not be angry with me, father," he said, gravely. 

"You have done three evil things to-night," said the 
old man. 

"One is not always virtuous. . . . But I will see you in 
the morning. I must sleep. You also, father. You are 

" No. I'm drunk. Men see truth when they are drunk. 
They see things they do not look at in their sober 
times. Your mother, who was a scholar, always used to say 
there is truth in wine. Damnable truth. Never mind, 
Orosdi, my son. We cannot help ourselves." 

But Orosdi had slipped from the house, and the old man 
was talking to an empty room. He continued maundering 
for a long time until, overcome by sleep, he fell gently on the 
floor with closed eyes. 

The Impending Triumph of 

By Sir Leo Chiozza Money 

Late Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Shipping 

I SEE that the industrial constituency which I should have 
contested as a Lloyd George man if I had elected to stay in 
the Coalition Government returned the ticketed candidate, 
who stood because I did not stand, by a majority of over 
10,000. By way of contrast, I was defeated at South 
Tottenham, where I stood for Labour, by 853 votes. 

There it is in a nutshell. I had only to go to and 

shout, " What's the matter with Lloyd George ? " to be 
returned, and any other man could have done the same. The 
Prime Minister has carried on his back into Parliament 
a great majority, which includes an amazing collection 
of reactionaries, war profiteers, dummies, and worse, who 
counted for nothing to the small part of the electorate 
which " returned " them. The votes, especially the votes 
of middle-class women, were for that popular figure — 
Lloyd George. The man of action has triumphed, and 
when I reflect on the incorrigible dullness and inertia 
which characterise our governing classes as a whole, and the 
rarity with which mankind anywhere throws up a leader of 
men, I pay to a lost hope of democracy the passing tribute 
of a sigh. 

In circumstances dictated by its foes organised Labour 
did remarkably well at the election. The new Franchise Act, 
full of absurdities and anomalies, which afford a lively 
demonstration of the " progressive " value of Coalition legis- 
lation in domestic affairs, enlarged the membership of the 
House of Commons to 707, of which number British seats 
account for 602. The official list of Labour Party candidates 
before me aggregates 359, so that as many as 243 seats in 
Great Britain were uncontested by Labour. Yet the Party 
scored 2,375,202 votes, while the Coalitionists, who contested 


all the 602: seats, scored 5,096,233 votes. Comparing seats 
contested with the Times analysis of the voting, we get : — 

Labour contesting 359 seats obtained 2,375,202 votes. I 

Coalition contesting 602 seats obtained 3,484,269 " Unionist" votes. | 

1,450,443 " Liberal " votes, I 

and 161,521 "N.D.P." votes. I 

There is little doubt that if the Labour Party had been in 
a position to contest every seat in Great Britain it would have 
scored at least 1,600,000 more votes, giving a voting strength, 
even in the existing conditions, of about 4,000,000, against 
the Coalition's 5,100,000. 

But, as is well known, a large proportion of the Labour 
candidatures were undertaken at the last moment from 
scratch, with little money and less organisation. In my own 
case I had thirteen working days from the date of my first 
meeting to polling-day, and I started without a vestige of 
organisation. There was a large number of similar cases, 
nearly a hundred Labour candidatures being endorsed in the 
few weeks immediately preceding the election. Often there 
was not money enough to go round in the new enormous 
electorates. Leisured men, able to give time freely to 
canvassing and other voluntary work, are, in the nature of the 
case, unknown to the Labour forces. Vehicles are not to be 
had. Labour has no daily Press, and that fact alone makes 
its electoral record astonishing. Thus -at every point the 
cards are marked against us. 

The 161,521 votes recorded for "National Democratic 
Party " candidates, which returned ten men to Parliament and 
kept out of it many more by splitting Labour votes, should 
not escape attention. This alleged " Party " is our old friend 
the British Workers' League. It began as a League to 
promote Socialism, and as a Socialist I was invited to become, 
and became, one of its vice-presidents. As a Socialist I 
contributed to the columns of its organ, the British Citizen, 
without charge, articles on shipping, etc., advocating, as I 
have always done, the nationalisation of public services, 
including maritime transport. 

Two quotations from these articles of mine will show 
the character which I attributed to this League when I 
joined it : — 

" What the Government did in respect of ships was to 
protect the shipowner by providing him with a State insur- 
ance scheme against war risks. Having done that, and the 


British taxpayers having provided the British Navy, which 
is of special value to the shipowner, the shipowner was left 
master of the situation. 

" The shipowner was master of the situation for this 
reason. About one-half of our food and more than three- 
fourths of our raw materials are derived from over-sea. 
Without ships to carry food and materials the nation would 
be brought to a standstill in a few months. In a war like 
this, therefore, when there is an extra call upon the carry'ing 
trade, a shipowner is placed in a position of commanding 
advantage. It is true that for Government purposes ships 
can be, and are, commandeered at reasonable ' Blue-book ' 
rates, but this in the given circumstances only serves to raise 
the rate of profit on those not commandeered. The ship- 
owner, in effect, makes the free ship pay a high profit on 
both the free and the controlled ship." 

And, again, commenting on Trade Union Congress 
resolutions : — 

" ' Our vital industries should no longer be left in the 
hands of capitalists, whose first object is profits, and 
workers, whose first object is wages.' 

" This goes to the root of the matter. Work for individual 
profit makes profit the real output of the capitalist, and 
work-making the real aim of the worker. For the capitalist 
it becomes not so much a matter of producing goods for 
the national interest, but how and in what directions it is 
most easily possible to make margins. That often leads to 
the utter neglect of all-important industries. The work- 
men, on the other hand, with no interest in work but the 
wage, find in practice that the dignity of labour is a hollow 

The contribution of my professional work free of charge 
was my sole connection with a body which, although I 
resigned from it in 19 17, actually used my name on its 
** literattire " to obtain votes for its candidates in the election 
zvkilst running one of its men against me in South Tottenham/ 

In 19 1 7, finding that the League was becoming largely 
a "Tariff Reform" body, I resigned, and so, I think, did 
Mr. H. G. Wells and others. A few days after my 
resignation I was approached by a leading member of 
the Government, who begged me to remain connected 
with it. What he said confirmed my conviction that I 
was right to close my association with the body. Later the 


intention of the League to do its utmost to split the Labour 
ranks became clear, and on the eve of the election it suddenly 
appeared as the " National Democratic Party," with a good 
deal of money at its command, and contested a number of 
seats, winning ten of them. Its leader, Mr. Clement Edwards, 
M.P., by splitting the Progressive vote at East Ham, defeated 
Mr. Arthur Henderson, who, I understand, was denounced as 
a Bolshevist and traitor, who rejoiced to shake hands with the 
gory defilers of Belgian women. I did not know that Mr. 
Clement Edwards was ever a Socialist, and his association 
with the League shows how far it has travelled from its 
original purpose. 

One may differ in some things from the propaganda of 
General Page Croft, of the " National Party," but on one 
point there can surely be nothing but agreement. He 
contends, as I understand it, that secret party funds should be 
abolished, and that every political association should be 
compelled to disclose the source of its income and what it does 
with its money. When penniless men, unsupported by 
Labour organisations proper, become able to spend nearly 
£1,000 in defeating a Labour candidate, the public has a right 
to know where the money comes from. What is the source of 
the funds of the National Democratic Party? Whose money 
was it that in South Tottenham, for example, secured 1,916 
votes for a " National Democratic Party " candidate ? Those 
votes — I was defeated by only 853 — kept me out of 
Parliament. They cost somewhere about 6s. Sd. per vote. 
Who paid that 6s. Sd. per vote? In another constituency, I 
see, a British Workers' League man split off some 700 votes, 
which cost, therefore, about £\ each. Who paid that £1 per 
vote? That question must be asked and answered in 

I am further informed that a new capitalist combination 
was formed for election purposes to run Coalition candidates. 
I am told that the capital commanded by its members amounts 
to ;^40o,ooo,ooo. It ran 87 Coalition candidates, offering 
them canvassers, organisers, and funds. It has got into 
Parliament, so the story goes, 55 of its members, and one 
gentleman in particular to be its official spokesman. Good 
Coalitionists, all these, eager to make a land " fit for heroes 
to live in" ! 

To crown the Labour disadvantages, the soldiers were 
robbed of the franchise. As late as the end of November 
Mr. Bonar Law declared that 75 per cent, of the " absents " 


would be able to vote. On December 12th the Prime 
Minister, who was, as usual, very badly informed, replied to 
a pertinent " voice," which asked, " Will the soldiers be able 
to vote ? " by saying, " You need not be afraid about that. 
The soldiers, and many more than some of our friends care 
for, will record their votes. . . . You will see British ballot- 
boxes carried across the Rhine, set up in German cities, and 
the British army voting at Cologne. (Laughter and cheers.)" 
The Prime Minister, thus curiously ignorant of the fact that 
soldiers had to vote, if they could, by post, was proved to be 
as inaccurate as the Chancellor of the Exchequer. In some 
constituencies one in three, in others one in four, of the 
" absent voters " polled, and even these proportions overstate 
the case, for, as the postmarks showed, no small part of the 
soldiers' votes actually recorded were those of men on leave at 
home or those stationed in the United Kingdom. Of the 
soldiers actually abroad, not more than one in six voted. 

This mattered everything to Labour, for there is over- 
whelming evidence to show that the soldiers, if they 
had had the chance, would have voted Labour. Even 
in cases such as mine, where there was not time to send out 
an election address, the soldiers' votes actually recorded 
were good for labour. The Daily Mail, putting on 
record the evidence of its Paris Soldiers' Election Bureau, 
says : " Those votes [the soldiers' votes], we repeat, will be 
given, when the full opportunity arises, largely to candidates 
of advanced Labour views, but against Pacifists." And since 
the election the views of the soldiers have been made 
strikingly clear, even to our ill-informed Prime Minister. 

Taking everything into account, the Labour Party has 
every reason to be proud of the results of an election in which 
fair play was denied it. On the votes actually cast, propor- 
tional representation would give it, not the 62 seats actually 
won, but as the Times has shown (January 3rd, 19 19), as 
many as 133, witkotit allowing for any share of uncontested 

When it is remembered that we did not contest, for lack of 
time and funds, as many as 243 seats, and that if they had 
been contested our total poll would have been about 
4,000,000, we see that, by proportional representation, Labour 
is roundly entitled to four seats to every five held by the 
Coalition. An election in nine months' time, with the soldiers 
home, would not only reverse the alleged "verdict," but 
probably, under the ridiculous one-member constituencv and 


majority system, put Labour in power with an unfairly large 
majority in proportion to its voting strength. 

There is another way of putting the results of the election, 
and that is to pit the " Unionist " polls against the remainder, 
thus : — 

Votes for Unionists : — 

Coalition Ticket 3,484,269 

No Ticket 369.555 

Total 3,853,824 

Votes for Liberal and Labour Candidates : — 

Coalition Ticket Liberals 1,450,443 

No Ticket Liberals 1,298,808 

Labour Party 2,375,202 

N.D.P 161,521 

Others (Not Coalition) 55o»3ii 

Total ... -... 5,836,285 

Looked at in this way, we see a majority of 1,982,461 
against the Unionist Party, and I notice that in a Liberal 
organ a correspondent derives great comfort from such an 
analysis. It is an ominous analysis for the Unionist Party, 
but it is not advanced here as a serious argument. Labour 
has in most cases no more in kind with the gentlemen returned 
as "Liberals" or "Coalition Liberals" than it has with 
" Unionists," ticketed or unticketed. 

Indeed, the reduction of the unticketed Liberal vote to 
1,298,808 is one of the most significant facts of the election. 
Labour now takes its place on the Opposition bench, and from 
that position it will not be displaced until it assumes power. 
Liberalism has had its day. In matters of " social reform " 
it is in the rear of the Young Tories. Labour is appreciably 
nearer in outlook to Major Waldorf Astor, M.P., or to 
Lord Robert Cecil, M.P., than to Mr. Runciman or 
Mr. McKenna. In fundamentals Labour stands alone the 
sole advocate of the public ownership of the means of life. 
Liberals and Tories, ticketed and unticketed, may differ 
among themselves about liquor, or Home Rule, or Free 
Trade, but they are all in complete agreement that the 
capitalist system must be preserved. That is the acid test. 
To vary the famous phrase of Sir William Harcourt, "We 
are all social reformers nowadays, but we are not all 
Socialists." The Labour Party is definitely a Socialist Party, 
out to give miners and railwaymen and all other workers not 


merely " better conditions," but the self-respect in work which 
can alone be derived from ownership and control. 

When Mr. Lloyd George elected to sell out our national 
war property to the capitalists and to restore to private 
controls the trades which through private control nearly 
brought u^ to irretrievable disaster in the war, he took a stand 
which enabled many of us to decide which way to go. It is 
just as well that the issue should be made pellucidly clear. 
Labour stands for the national ownership of the nation. The 
others — it matters not what they are termed — stand for 
private control of the means of production, distribution, and 

From the point of view of Labour it is clear gain that 
Liberals and Tories should join hands in a Coalition which 
expresses that which is fundamentally true — their agreement 
about the chief thing that matters. If we go to the Liberal 
Publication Department and buy the latest pamphlets of the 
Liberal Party we find them exceedingly lukewarm, or even 
hostile, on the subject of national control of the national 
economy. The National Liberal Federation's -resolutions 
of September, 191 8, under the curious heading, " Liberties of 
the People," demanded that " the bureaucratic control of 
trade and labour" should be "brought to an end.". This 
bracketing of trade, the master of labour, with labour itself 
is a neat illustration of the Liberal Party's bankruptcy of 
ideas. As long as capitalists are free to do what they like 
with their own, labour must remain servile to private official- 
dom. The control of trade saved the nation in the war from 
starvation and disaster. The neglect by Liberal statesmen 
to control trade in 191 5 and 19 16 deprived us of stocks of 
food and materials which would have rendered the submarine 
campaign futile. We won through with grave difficulty, and 
barely escaped ruin because the nation, its ships, and its 
resources were in private hands when the war broke out and 
because private interests were not soon enough curbed. 

Now that the war is over the question, " Who shall control 
us?"^ is no less urgent. Parliament at Westminster must 
remain a mockery of Government while the ownership which 
alone confers full power to rule remains in private hands. 
If the stimulus of patriotism did not move our capitalists to 
save us in war, what are we to expect of private ownership in 
peace ?^ The answer is written plainly in our inefficient 
industries and the filthy purlieus of our great cities. Our 
factories as a whole lag far behind the achievements of 


science, and our cities degrade the workers whose labour is 
so largely wasted in working inefficient plants, and in useless 
or even maleficent employments. 

Tories, Liberals, Conservatives, Unionists, Free Traders, 
Protectionists, Tariff Reformers, with Coalition labels or with- 
out — it matters little what they are called — they all stand for 
selling out the national war stock : for putting up to auction the 
ships, shipyards, factories, warehouses, engines, machinery, 
wagons, etc., worth hundreds of millions of pounds, which 
the nation built to save itself in war, and with which the 
nation might begin forthwith to save its people in peace. We 
have the chance to " reconstruct " industry by modernising its 
methods, changing its motive, and enlisting its productive 
agents as partners instead of serfs. Tories and Liberals alike 
are determined that the experiment shall not be tried. The 
factories and ships are up for sale even as I write. Buy, 
buy — who will buy ? 

But let those who buy and those who sell alike take notice. 
As surely as the day follows the night a Labour Government 
will be in power in this country within a few years. It will be 
the first duty of that Government to restore to public owner- 
ship that which is being most improperly sold. If a private 
electric power monopoly is set up it will be promptly 
dethroned. If our railways are bought out at an outrageous 
price there will have to be restitution. Mr. Lloyd George 
has promised the capitalists they shall not be plundered. 
The Labour Party promises the people that capitalists shall 
not be allowed much longer to plunder them as they have been 
plundered in this war. 

The issue is clear and the battle joined. The Minority 
Parliament elected under fraudulent conditions in December 
is doomed even before it meets. The gigantic Coalition 
majority represents less than one-fourth of the electorate. 
The situation which consequently arises is one of grave 
difficulty and danger, and it is the plain duty of the Prime 
Minister to give an immediate pledge that a new General 
Election shall be held as soon as the soldiers are demobilised 
and in a position to record their votes. 

Persia and the Conference 

By the Rt. Hon. Ameer AH 

In the re-mapping of the world and the settlement of the 
future destinies of the smaller nations which it may be pre- 
sumed will be one of the supreme tasks before the Peace 
Conference, Persia will probably receive considerable atten- 
tion. Nor can the help Afghanistan has given to the Allies 
be overlooked. These two States lie between the Western 
frontiers of India and the Zagros mountains, which had 
hitherto been the Eastern frontier of Asiatic Turkey. They 
form the kernel of the Middle East, and have for many years 
past stood between two Ideals — one of might, the other of 
justice. Until the disappearance of the Tsarist Empire they 
served as " buffers " between Russia and England. The 
collapse of Russia and Germany has removed all risk of 
conflict in the East between the two Ideals; and England 
stands now in Asia without a rival to contest or question her 

The Persians are one of the smaller nations who deserve 
the sympathy and support of the great Democracies of the 
West to maintain their national existence intact and uninter- 
fered with. Through long centuries of vicissitudes the 
Persian people have clung to their national ideals and retained 
their national characteristics. Persia's past history, her place 
in middle Asia, the influence she has exercised on the develop- 
ment of the neighbouring nations, above all the courage and 
restraint with which her people won their emancipation from a 
grinding tyranny, and her loyal stedfastness to the Allied 
Cause, merit general interest. 

The recent history of Persia is the story of Russia's 
encroachments which began in the early part of the nineteenth 
century, and from that day forth until the great collapse of the 
Romanoff dynasty Tsarist Russia persistently endeavoured to 
destroy Persia as an independent State. Russia's slow but 
sure strangulation of this stricken and afflicted country remind 
one vividly of the process by which the python crushes out the 
life and afterwards swallows the victim of its appetite. 

The absorption of Persia was the first step in her struggle 


with Great Britain for the dominancy of the Eastern world. 
Both Afghanistan and Persia stood in her relentless march 
towards the rich plains of India and the warm waters of the 
Indian Ocean. Persia was easier to deal with, as being- 
further away from India British susceptibilities were less 
likely to be affected. So she devoted her attention primarily 
to the disintegration of this unfortunate country. 

The Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907, which divided 
Persia into tw^o spheres of influence, Russian and British, 
removed the checks that had hitherto kept Romanoff ambitions 
within bounds. And she began at once her disintegrating 

Iphigenia offered as a sacrifice to the gods represents in 
many respects the fate of Persia at the hands of Western 
diplomacy. She was placed on the altar to propitiate the 
insatiable appetite of the giant of the north. The Anglo- 
Russian compact was concluded on August 31st, 1907, shortly 
after Persia had extracted from her King a promise of real 
national life. In an article in the Orient Revieiv I ventured 
to call attention to the unwisdom of the policy which led 
England to enter into that compact, and I gave a brief restmie 
of the Romanoff attitude from the end of the eighteenth century 
down to 1907, showing one continuous record of want of good 
faith on the part of the Tsarist Government towards Great 
Britain. It is probably known to many of us that the Afghan 
wars as well as the great cataclysm of the Indian Mutiny were 
worked up by Russian intrigue. The Romanoffs were known 
not to keep faith even with the people they subjugated. 
It is no wonder that they did not attach much importance to 
fair dealing with outsiders. A reference to the Tsarist treat- 
ment of the subject races might perhaps be of interest. In 
Ukrainia the indigenous institutions and popular rights, in 
spite of solemn pledges, were ruthlessly swept away soon after 
the engagements were made. It sounds like the story of the 
present day, of happenings under our eyes. In Riga, just 
before the war, there was a massacre, the description of which 
was allowed to appear in only one of the English papers. 
What happened in Georgia under the dethroned Nicholas has 
been recently told by an "eye-witness" in the following 
words : — 

" But when the present writer reached the place a few years before the war 
the interest was modern. Russian soldiers were quartered in the church — 
evidence of the fatal treat)' by which the last of the Georgian line had laid the 
Caucasus under Russian protection rather more than a centur>' before. By 
that treaty the Georgians were to retain their king, and they had never had a 


king since ; they were only to serve in a national militia, and now they were 
sent as conscripts to die in Arctic provinces; no more than 6,000 Russian 
troops were ever to be allowed in the country, and now 180,000 were quartered 
there; the Georgian Church was to remain independent, and now it was 
enslaved to Russia's Holy Synod; the Georgian language was to remain the 
tongue of schools and official life, and now it was forbidden in both ; govern- 
ment wi\s to remain in Georgian hands, and now the Russian officers and 
Russian bureaucrats were everywhere supreme. After a brief attempt to 
regain the freedom of self-government, the country was being laid waste by 
Cossacks and other Russian troops. Nicholas II. had issued express orders 
that no mercy was to be shown — and none was shown. All the villages in the 
fertile district of Guria, inland from Batum, were burnt, all the crops 
destroyed, the inhabitants killed or driven up into the snowy mountains ; 
women and girls collected in groups because, in the words of Colonel Kriloff 
(33rd Chersonese Regiment), who carried out the orders, 'The Tsar wanted 
loyal subjects breeding.'"* 

And only recently, in November, 191 6, 500,000 Khirgiz- 
Mussulrrians were slaughtered in the presence of their women 
and children because they refused to be conscripted during 
harvest time. An account of this inconceivable atrocity 
appeared again only in one English newspaper, from the pen 
of Mr. Morgan Philips Price. 

It is not surprising that when the Romanoff Empire fell 
there was a feeling among the races of the world whom it had 
oppressed for centuries that at last retribution had come. 

A short statement of the dealings of the Russians imme- 
diately after they obtained a free hand in Northern Persia 
may not be without interest. 

In 1909, under the pretext that the Russian Consul was in 
danger, a large Russian force entered Tabriz. A few months 
later another body of troops was landed in Persia and 
marched to Kazvin in order to prevent the Constitutionalists 
from advancing on the capital to dethrone Mohammed Ali 
Mirza. In September, 1909, the well-known brigand and 
Russian proidge, Rahim Khan, attacked Ardebil in the North 
of Persia ; this formed a pretext for sending more troops into 
Persia. When Rahim Khan was defeated by the Persian 
troops, the Romanoff Government, in defiance of its treaties 
with Persia, afforded him a refuge in Russian territory. 

In the following year (19 10) a Persian Prince, naturalised 

* The Revue Internationale for May-June, 1918, gives us an idea of the 
barbarities committed by the Tsarist Government upon its own subjects. In 
an article headed " L'Effondrement du Tzarisme" the Russian writer, Nicholas 
Roubakin, describes the horrors perpetrated by the Tsar's agents in some of 
the districts as an illustration of the character of the Government. At 
Koursa, for example, for punishing the peasants for threatening disorders. 
General Doubassof ordered the complete destruction of peasants' houses in 
entire communes, comprising those of the innocent ; the Governor-General 
of Ekaterinoslav blew up peasants by cannon ; the troops shot down women 
and children. The same thing took place in other regions. Women iand girls 
were violated; girls and old men were flogged. 


in Russia, conceived the plan of overthrowing the Persian 
Constitutional Government. The Russian authorities not 
only refused to allow the Persian forces to deal with the 
rebel, but actually fired on them near Kazvin and killed the 
commanding officer. 

In 191 1 more troops were poured into Persia, where their 
treatment of the inhabitants was that of a conquered country. 

The December of 191 1 will always be remembered by the 
Persians as one of the darkest in their history. Romanoff 
agents succeeded in provoking in Tabriz an armed conflict 
between the Constitutionalist police force of that city and the 
Russian troops, which was attended with great brutality. In 
the course of the fight a large number of women and children 
were killed. The climax was reached on the loth of 
Moharrem, a day of great sanctity in the Mohammedan world. 
Among the enormities they committed was the hanging of the 
chief ecclesiastic of Tabriz, the Sikut-ul-Islam, a man who 
was highly esteemed and venerated throughout Persia. 

In April, 19 12, the Russians also bombarded the sacred 
shrine of Meshed. 

The murder of Persian ecclesiastics in Tabriz and the 
slaughter of innocent people, coupled with the bombardment 
of Meshed, sent a thrill through the Mussulman world. 
Eleg^ies were published in most of the Moslem papers in 
India, where the sorrow at the treatment of Persian people 
was most deep and bitter. 

Russia's object always was to bring about the dissolution 
of Persia, and for that purpose she resorted to every 
form of intrigue likely to produce disintegration and 
chaos. Every sign of vitality among the people, ever\^ 
effort to introduce reforms or improvements in the admin- 
istration was made a reason for aggression. When we 
bear in mind that the initial success of the Constitutional 
movement was due to the support of the British represen- 
tative in Persia, we can easily understand the consternation 
of the Persian people at the acquiescence of England in these 
acts of the Romanoff Government, and especially in bringing 
about the expulsion of the American financial expert, 
Mr. Shuster. 

Now that the Romanoff dynasty has fallen, Persian hopes 
for the dawn of a new era in their country have risen high ; 
and it remains for England, which has fought this great 
war as the champion of liberty for all small nationalities, to 
be true to her own ideals, true to herself, and to give Persia a 


helping hand to make the best use of the free system of 
Government her people wrested from the hands of a tyrant. 

Persia has always looked upon England as her friend and 
as a champion of her liberty and progress. While Russia was 
viewed' with suspicion and her advance towards the East 
was regarded with alarm, England was trusted and her advice 
was invariably sought and acted upon. In issuing loans or 
giving concessions for the development of the country, 
England was always approached first and her counsel asked 
for. In 1905, when the Persian Revolution began with a 
pacific strike, the Constitutionalists sought refuge at the 
British Legation in Teheran. This in itself was abundant 
proof of the confidence the Persians reposed in England. 
The Anglo-Russian agreement, with its manifest tendencies, 
which soon proved themselves in direct acts of interference 
and aggression, caused the widest apprehension. The 
attempt of the Tsarist Government to obtain control of the 
Persian army and finance, and the occupation of most of the 
Northern Provinces, were all part and parcel of the policy 
designed for the final absorption of Persia. When the 
present war broke out, the Romanoff army treated the part of 
the country they had occupied as conquered territories. 

The fortunes of Persia, so far as they are in her own 
hands, are guided primarily by eight enlightened and 
patriotic men, some of whom are the best products of what 
was best in Europe before this war came to reduce to 
ashes centuries of material and moral progress. They are 
assisted by an assembly elected on a broad basis of 
constitutional liberty, with some stake in the country. All 
men above the age of twenty-five have the franchise and the 
right to vote in the election of members to the Persian 
Parliament. There is only one house ; and all creeds 
and nationalities are represented in the assembly in pro- 
portion to their numbers and importance. The young 
Shah, who attained his majority a little while ago, is a consti- 
tutional monarch, carefully brought up during the regency of 
that gifted statesman, the Nasir-ul-Mulk, and seems to 
possess qualities which might make him a benefactor to his 
countr)^ It would be an advantag^e both to Persia and the 
Allied Powers if the injustice committed against her in the early 
part of the nineteenth century were set right. Rectification of 
her frontiers is now essentially necessary, especially in the 
Transcaspian res^ion, in order to give her a proper defensible 
frontier to guard against the danger of Bolshevik incursions. 


It would only be right that the districts annexed by Russia in 
181 3 and 1828 should be returned to Persia, not merely 
because they were forcibly and unjustly wrenched from her, 
but because those districts are inhabited by people of the 
Persian race, for the most part Shiahs. In 181 3 Baku, 
Chirvan, Guendji^ Karabagh, Cheki, and Talish were 
annexed by Russia; in 1828 Erivan and Nakhtchevan were 
added, in spite of the protests of their Moslem inhabitants, 
who were in the majority. A century of foreign rule has not 
diminished their love for, and loyalty to, Persia. 

Again, if a separate regime is to be established for 
Mesopotamia, would it not be right to give the guardianship 
of the Shiah holy places — Kerbela, Najaf, Kazmain, and 
Samara — to Persia? Also the Treaties and Conventions 
founded on the oppressive Treaty of Turkomanchai in 1828 
will, it is earnestly to be hoped, be revised. 

Hitherto the British Government has considered Persia as 
a buffer State between her Asiatic Dominions and Russia. 
The collapse of Russia has, at present, removed the danger on 
that side ; but the conditions which prevail at present in Asia 
cannot escape attention. 

What appears to me essential is the necessity of avoiding 
even the semblance of an attempt to " Egyptianise " Persia 
(to borrow a French phrase) and of not repeating the mistake 
which was common twenty-five years ago in the native States 
of India of allowing British officers an undesirable and 
impolitic latitude in their treatment of the native 

The Problem of Russia 

By Hamilton Fyfe 

Editorial Note. — Mr. Hamilton Fyfe has known Russia for the last ten 
years. He was there for two years during the war. He warned the Asquith y 
Government privately at the beginning of 1916 that it was useless to count \ 
upon further Russian effort. He foretold the Revolution, while Lord Milner, ] 
after his visit to Petrograd, was assuring everybody that all was well. A \ 
year ago, when Oflficialism looked for Bolshevism to disappear in a few weeks, | 
Mr. Fyfe wrote that the Soviet Government had the support of the mass of \ 
the Russian people, and was likely to gain rather than lose power. His views 
are entitled, therefore, to a hearing. 

The end of the long wars with Napoleon was followed by 
a determined campaign against the efforts of Peoples to gain 
their liberty. The Emperors of Russia and Austria, the 
King of Prussia, and, to our everlasting shame, the Govern- 
ment of Great Britain, combined, under such leaders as 
Metternich, Hardenberg, and Castlereagh, to resist every 
attempt to throw off the fetters of despotic incompetence. 

In that early nineteenth century it was ostensibly the 
sovereigns who combined to choke the cry for People's Rule, 
but it was not the sovereigns alone. The guiding hands of the 
Congress at Aix-la-Chapelle in 1818, and of the conspiracy 
against freedom to which that abominable gathering gave 
birth, were the Tsar Alexander and the Austrian statesman 
Metternich. To-day there is no one to take the place of the 
Autocrat; but there may be statesmen no less obstinate and 
cunning than Metternich hiding among those who take part 
in the Peace Conference. 

The Comfortable Class in England is at this moment ready 
to back up anything in the nature of what it calls " strong 
action " against the pioneers of a New Order. " Put 'em 
against a wall " is the watchword of middle-aged and elderly 
clubmen. The war has made all who took no -part in it infinitely 
more inclined to violence than ever they were before. If 
these could have their way they would provoke violence 
enough, but, as in Russia, they themselves would be the 
objects of it. 

That a New Order will arise everywhere out of the ruins 
of the Old Order which the war brought to an end is certain. 
" It is now a question of building a new house. For that the 


old parties are no longer good enough. The old party 
system must be overthrown, or must be forced to a renewal." 
Those sentences are taken from an appeal to the youth of 
Germany published by a group of German civil servants. 
They are true of all countries. Whatever happens in one 
European land is now certain to have its repercussion in every 
other; and is likely to have its counterpart as well among all 
Peoples who have reached more or less the same stage of 
development. The nations are now in close touch. Ideas 
spread quickly. 

Since 1848 governing men in England have been afraid 
openly to resist popular demands. They have declared for 
People's Rule, but they have at the same time done their best 
to prevent the People from ruling. The result of this sham 
democracy has been to turn the thoughts of many towards 
other methods than those of Parliamentary action. These 
many see that although numerous laws have been passed and 
numerous demands of the People apparently granted, the 
improvement in social conditions has been slight. They lose 
hope, therefore, of sweeping away the Old System by succes- 
sive constitutional amendments. They say it must be 
destroyed by one mighty blow delivered in the form of a 
forcible seizure of government, followed by insistence upon a 
new economic formula. 

It is not probable that such crimes and follies as have 
occurred in Russia would be repeated in France, England, 
or Germany. The Russian masses are ignorant and impres- 
sionable to a degree which can only be realised by those 
acquainted with them. The men who have directed the 
course of Russian history since the fall of Kerensky are 
theorists with such a determination to force their theories 
into practice, and such a disregard for considerations of 
common prudence, as could hardly be practised outside of 

The ignorance of the People there, which accounts for their 
callous torpidity, is not so much lack of information as lack ^ 
of experience. They are unsophisticated. They cannot 
think more than one thought at a time. An example of this 
occurs to me. Before the Revolution men and women 
fought to secure places in Petrograd street-cars so violently 
that injuries were often caused, dresses often torn, buttons 
wrenched off overcoats, galoshes lost. The one thought in the 
minds of the combatants was " I must get in." No check of 
decent behaviour or humanity could find entrance at the same 


time. After the Revolution, when orderly methods, miknown 
under the corrupt and incapable Tsardom, were being 
established, the custom was introduced of forming queues. 
Instantly the formula, " First come, first served," took posses- 
sion of people's minds. None fought, none even grumbled. 
No greater muddle or more complete change in the habits of a 
population could be imagined. It illustrated vividly the 
single-action mechanism of the Russian brain. 

The European mind is, by comparison, complex. If one 
had to explain in a sentence the effect of civilisation, one 
might say : " It accustoms the mind to think more than one 
thought at a time." Thus, if it were proposed to English 
villagers to massacre the squire, the parson, and the village 
constable, they would feel a shock, however bitterly they 
might have resented landlordism, inquisitorial patronage, 
petty tyranny. They would perceive at once the dispropor- 
tion between the faults and the punishment suggested. They 
would recoil from the horror of mangled bodies. Their 
imaginations would warm with pity for the women and 
children who would be bereft of husbands, fathers, and daily 
bread. To the Russian mind none of these considerations 
would present themselves. Its one thought would be, " We 
have suffered ; now we will have our revenge." The 
murder committed, the hot fit over, the murderers would very 
likely be stricken with remorse. They would be able to think 
of nothing but their crime against human brotherhood and the 
just retribution of an angry God. 

No one can judge the Russians fairly who has not sat, as 
I have many times, in Russian police-offices and watched the 
poor folk cower and cringe, and burn with powerless indig- 
nation at the haughty, and often brutal, bearing of the stupid 
officials, each eaten up by an absurd sense of his own . 
importance. No one has the right to condemn a people for 
its acts who has not seen, and experienced with them, the 
provocation they endured. The frivolous irresponsibility of 
the wealthy and aristocratic classes, the self-seeking and 
slackness of the bureaucrats by whom the country was 
governed, the extortionate tyranny of the minor officials 
(whose pay, it must be admitted, was so poor that only bribery 
saved them from starving), the callousness about human life 
and the insensibility to human suffering which (to take but one 
example) sent thousands of soldiers into battle unarmed, 
might be accounted just cause for even more appalling 
revenges than the Russians took. 


Europeans, however, have not such embers of resentment 
smouldering in their hearts. They would have no reason for 
fear of that desperate kind which kept the guillotine busy in 
1792, and which has of late made the Russians strike so 
wildly — unless there existed a compact among the upholders 
of the Old System to crush all movements in the direction of 
further developing the democratic idea. 

It is by no means certain that some such compact does not 
exist already as a tacit understanding. How else explain 
the action of the Allied and Associated Powers in Russia? 
The danger threatens that the Old Gangs at the 
Peace Conference may secretly, or under some specious 
disguise of " assisting the People," or " restoring order," turn 
this understanding into the settled policy of Britain, France, 
Italy, and the United States. As the sovereigns of the early 
nineteenth century exerted themselves to prevent change, as 
they went to the assistance of any despot in difficulties and 
were able to delay the broadening down of freedom in France, 
in Spain, in Belgium, in the Kingdom of Naples and other 
parts of Italy, as well as in their own dominions, with results 
that still to-day are hindrances to liberty and good adminis- 
tration, so there is risk now of a conspiracy to prevent 
People's Rule from becoming more real anywhere; there is 
risk of concerted military efforts to hinder " the new house " 
from being built. 

In Russia the inception of these efforts was mainly due to 
the desire that something should be saved from the wreck of 
the Old System for those who had lent money (the greater 
number being French Republicans) to keep it up. That this 
is not avowed proves that the world's opinion on such matters 
has altered in recent years. Not long ago the Big Interests 
could command the open support of Governments. The 
lives of sailors or soldiers were considered to be well lost in 
the exaction of payment to bondholders or in the defence of 
trading rights, even when harmful, as in the war which Britain 
forced on China for the benefit of the opium trade. President 
Wilson was the first ruler who had the courage and the 
enlightened intelligence to break with that tradition. He 
it was evident, would not approve in Russia a course 
of which he disapproved in Mexico. Therefore, the motive 
which had most weight in disposing France and England to 
make war upon Russia was unmentioned. As little as 
possible was said on the subject. When it was necessary to 
say something, the reasons advanced were the dislike of 


many Russians for the Bolshevik experiment, the atrocities 
committed by the Bolsheviks, and the desirability of 
" reconstituting the Eastern front." 

Here we see in vivid relief how the Old System hung 
toge\ther and how readily those which are left take action 
against an attempt at a New System. The Russians who 
disliked the Tsardom were quite as numerous as those who 
are dissatisfied with Bolshevik rule. The atrocities com- 
mitted by the Tsardom were vastly more in number, and 
certainly not less revolting, than those committed by the 
Bolsheviks, even if we include in the latter category acts of 
individual frenzy, such as the murder of that honourable^ 
capable, and sincerely democratic man, Shingarieff. Yet no 
step was ever taken in France or England to show dis- 
approval, even in diplomatic form, with the methods of the 
Tsar's Government. Whenever this was proposed the reply 
made by governing persons was.: " We cannot interfere with 
the internal affairs of Russia." Do not let us forget that we 
helped the Tsar to crush the movement of freedom in 1905 by 
financing him. That was the attitude of the Old Gangs 
towards " one of us." In their eyes the Bolshevik system is 
an interloper, and must be, if possible, suppressed. Exactly 
the attitude of Russia, Prussia, Austria, and Great Britain 
towards all democratic strivings between 18 15 and 1848! 
Now, in place of irresponsible monarchies, we have Big 
Interests. If there had been no Big Interests involved there 
would have been no intervention in Russian internal affairs. 

Speaking as one who bought in 19 15- 16, and who has long 
since written off as a bad debt fifteen thousand roubles' worth 
of Russian war loan, I contend that it is better for Russia's 
creditors to lose their money than to make war on 200,000,000 
people in order to recover it. That this would be better 
for the mass of people everywhere is obvious. " The calcu- 
lation of profit in wars," Burke wrote, " is false. The blood 
of war should never be shed but to redeem the blood of man. 
It is well shed for our family, for our friends, for our God, 
for our country, for our kind. The rest is vanity; the 
rest is crime." Such a crime as war against Russia 
for a sordid object would unite the nation as nothing else 
could. We should have to send millions of soldiers; to add 
thousands of millions of pounds to our War Debt, and with all 
our sacrifices no decisive result could be hoped for. Russia 
cannot be *' assisted." Order cannot be restored by any 
outside agency. From being the most backward among the m 


nations which ranked as Great Powers — backward, I mean, in 
their growth towards self-government — the Russians have 
passed at one stride to the position of the most advanced. 
With daring born of inexperience they are maii:ing an experi- 
ment which may decide the direction of all democratic 
systems from now on, or which may fail and be remembered 
only as a freak effort like the Brook Farm Colony or Fourier's 
Phalanstere. They must work out their problem alone. 
Interference can only complicate it. 

Already the results of Allied policy have been lamentable. 
By supporting counter-revolutionary plots we have caused the 
deaths of hundreds of people — many, no doubt, innocent of 
any part in them. We might have learnt from the history of 
the French Revolution, and of others, that active opposition 
was certain to provoke bloody and indiscriminate reprisals. 
Robespierre, a man of sentiment, nurtured upon the humani- 
tarian doctrines of Rousseau, was forced, by fear of seeing the 
Old Regime restored, into a course of action which makes 
him still to-day execrated as one of mankind's worst 
enemies. The only safe and sensible mode of dealing with 
theorists who, with the active or inert support of the mass of the 
people, are trying to introduce new forms of government, is to 
let them try. That the Bolshevik leaders have such support is, 
I know, denied; but has sufficient evidence been produced 
to justify the denial? Do we know what the state of 
Russia really is? On November 22nd the Stockholm staff 
correspondent of The Times telegraphed : — 

"The conviction seems to be gaining ground among the Bolshevists and 
members of the Soviet Government in Russia that their power is waning, 
their days numbered, and the hour of retribution at hand." 

Two days before this Reuter's correspondent at Stockholm 
had reported : — 

" Passengers who have arrived here from Petrograd by the steamer hvXea 
report that the power of the Bolshevists is still strong, and that, as one of 
them said, ' There is nothing in Russia that can crush Bolshevism but victory, 
and that will not be easy.'" 

To decide between these opposite views was difficult, but 
worse was to come. Four days later, on November 26th, the 
special correspondent of The Times in Stockholm flatly 
contradicted the staff correspondent of that newspaper. He 
telegraphed : — 

"There is no possible doubt that the power, moral and material, of the 
Bolshevists is growing week by week, and will continue to grow until it is 
smashed by some outside force capable, not only of seizing Petrograd and 
Moscow, but of occupying every important town in the country for some 
considerable period." 



There we have the object of the interventionists plainly set 
forth. Admiral Kemp has avowed it no less openly in The 
Tvnes. We are told to hold Russia by force against the will 
of the people. We are to overthrow a Government which, 
however absurd and tyrannical it may appear to us, is accepted 
by the country, and we are to set up in its place — what? 
Nobody knows. 

A British official who was sent to Russia in the early part 
of 19 1 8, and who returned in November, is known to have 
stated that the Bolshevists are giving Russia a better adminis- 
tration than it had under the Tsardom — in fact, the 'best 
administration it has ever had. No re fort from this official has 
been published. His estimate has, however, been publicly 
confirmed by a French officer who arrived in Stockholm 
towards the end of November, and was interviewed by 
Renter's correspondent there on November 25. This officer 
said : — 

"The Bolshevists' position is strong. Trotsky is a good organiser. The 
peasants are passive, and are not expected to offer serious opposition to 
Bolshevism, unless attacked. Personal safety has now been attained, and it 
must be recognised that the present Government has established order." 

A year ago I stated in The Daily Mail that under the 
Bolshevists the food supply was better arranged and that life 
and property were more secure in the towns than they had 
been under Kerensky. This statement has not been chal- 
lenged, except by those who account the executions of persons 
suspected of disaffection towards the Bolshevist Govern- 
ment as evidence of disorder. Many say in England and 
in France: "But how could any sensible person be well 
affected towards such a Government?" That is an attitude 
of mind which aptly illustrates the meaning attached by 
Continental Socialists to the term bourgeois. In the first 
place, we do not clearly know what kind of a Government 
the Bolshevists have set up, or what their objects are. Of first- 
hand " news " from Russia there is scarcely any. What 
passes for news is gossip, much of it invented in order to stir 
up ill-feeling; almost all of it envenomed by prejudice. 
Neither in this country nor in the United States are there 
means of learning the truth about Russia. I take the following 
from a recent issue of the New Republic (New York) : — 

"What is the source of the lies about Russia which are being so 
systematically disseminated in this country? A" couple of weeks ago the 
statement was published on the front pages of the eastern newspapers that on 
November loth the Bolsheviki were to indulge in a general massacre of all 
their class opponents. But what actually happened on or about that day? 


The following dispatch published in the New York World may give som© 
idea : — ' The Soviet Council in Petrograd has adopted a resolution giving 
amnesty to all arrested hostages and persons alleged* to be involved in plots 
against the Soviets, except those whose detention is deemed necessary as a 
guaranty for the security of the Bolsheviki who have fallen into enemy hands.' 
Instead of a St. Bartholomew, a feast of reconciliation. The lie is published 
in the most conspicuous part of all the newspapers in the country. The truth 
is published in an inconspicuous part of one newspaper, whose contemporaries 
carefully abstain from copying. Is the case against the Bolsheviki so weak 
that it has to be sustained by lies?" 

In that last sentence some of the truth, at any rate, seems 
to be contained. Lies do appear to be necessary. Foolish 
persons in Government employ repeat incessantly that the 
Bolshevist leaders (men of high education themselves) aim at 
" exterminating the educated " and at destroying trade. Yet 
officials in this country, at the Foreign Office, at the Board of 
Trade, know that Trotsky appealed to the educated class in 
Russia to assist in building up a new system, and that many 
responded, including Maxim Gorki, Russia's foremost man 
of letters. They know that the Bolshevists, far from desiring 
to see commercial relations extinguished, are ready to discuss 
them. But the truth is concealed from the nation. Those 
who fancy their interests would be served by making war upon 
Russia, those who are duped easily by such catch-words as 
" restoring order," the generals and staff -officers who see long 
periods of safe and lucrative employment stretching before 
them, the newspaper writers who love to inflate grandiose 
schemes with the wind of their phrases, have, therefore, had 
it their own way. 

The latest effort to stir up anger against the Soviet 
Government is the accusation of " Bolshevik Imperialism." 
As evidence of this we have shaken in our faces the dispatch 
of Soviet troops to Poland and Lithuania. I admit this had a 
bad appearance, but it can, I think, be explained. The Letts 
and Esthonians have been well-disposed to the Soviet 
authorities, and it has been long understood that, as soon as 
the Baltic Provinces were relieved of German military occupa- 
tion, the Soviets would help them to establish a Republic or 
Republics, which they desire. For whom are we fighting in 
the Baltic Provinces? For the German Barons? 

As to Poland, the Soviet forces appear to me to have been 
sent there for exactly the same reason as that which The 
Times gives for this country supporting the movement to 
drive them out. The Times says it is necessary to keep the 
States which border Russia free from aggressive Bolshevism. 
The Bolsheviks not unnaturally argue the necessity for 

G 2 


keeping them free from aggressive anti-Bolshevism. Poland 
is not a State yet. The Ir'oles have not even settled among 
themselves what sort of a State they want their country to be. 
The Jewish Poles are as much afraid of the Christians as the 
Christians are said to be of Bolshevist Imperialism. When 
an independent Poland is created, I see no reason to suppose, 
from what has happened in like conditions elsewhere, that the 
Soviet Government will raise any objection. It had actually 
proposed before it sent troops into these territories, to discuss 
with the Allies and America this and other questions, includ- 
ing that of compensation to the holders of Russian 
Loans. The British Government declined the proposal ; then 
the Soviet forces were set in motion, the Soviet authorities 
seeing that they had to reckon with the settled hostility of 
France, Britain, and the United States, which, in making war 
upon them, had already invaded other Russian territories and 
might probably invade these also. 

" Bolshevist Imperialism " is merely another of the sticks 
which have been thought good enough to be used against a 
system guilty of no worse horrors than those which stained 
the Tsardom, but guilty of a crime far more detestable, in 
the eyes of the Old Gang of statesmen and diplomats, than 
the bloodiest repression : that is the crime of showing up the 
Old System of diplomatic intrigue, of endeavouring to make 
People's Rule a reality, and of refusing to recognise loans 
made to a monarchy so that it might strengthen itself against 
the demand for concessions to modern and democratic 

I do not defend Bolshevism; I do not like it. But I see a 
very grave danger in stirring up public opinion against it by 
abuse and exaggeration with the object of attempting its 
suppression by military means. What we should do is to 
bend our thoughts rather to to the economic development of 
Russia. We have ready to hand an organisation which might 
be of the greatest value — the Russian Co-operative Societies, 
with, at the smallest estimate, 12,000,000 members, which 
means that they supply the needs of 60,000,000 people. 
Russia is the only vast and increasing market in which we 
can hope to dispose of manufactured products and so keep off 
the peril of unemployment. Let us set that before our minds 
and let us distrust the counsel of those who have in every 
crisis of history been at fault in their judgment — the politi- 
cians and diplomats, worshipping that disastrous deity, the 
God of Things as They Were. 


Whether we may think the Soviet system admirable or 
damnable does not matter.- What does matter is that it shall 
have room to develop, to prove itself either valuable or futile. 
It has at least as g"ood a basis in philosophic argument as the 
old systems, which postulated that the chief power must 
reside In a small class, separated by manners and mode of 
life, by education and the habit of command, from the mass of 
the people. One of Trotsky's speeches at Moscow last 
summer stated as the opposing proposition : That the chief 
power should reside In the larpfest class, the workers, who 
should employ it in the creation of a new order, in which there 
should be no exploitation of one class by another, and In 
which all means of production, all wealth, should be at the 
disposal and under the control of the workers. The only 
objections which can be urged aofainst this are : — 

1. The objection of the small class at present 

cllnsring' to power. 

2. The obiection of those who roundlv declare 

anythlns: untried to be "Impossible." 
Ideally, it comes as near to justice as any system can; even 
upon the principles professed by those who oppose. They 
admit that the majority have the right to rule. The Soviet 
theory merely aims at transforming what has hitherto been an 
abstract and illusory privilege into a working reality. 

So far the results of democratic forms have not fulfilled 
our hopes. Probably no method of government ever will 
avoid disappointing its enthusiastic adherents. But that is 
no reason for abandoning the struggle towards Improvement. 
The conspiracy of the monarchical powers against People's 
Rule after the Napoleonic wars only prolonged the struggles 
of nineteenth-century reformers, causing bloodshed and 
misery untold; It could not check or alter the democratic 
tendency. Nor will conspiring among the oligarchies of 
to-day serve to do more than delay and complicate and stain 
with blood the further developments of this tendency — 
developments which have come Into sight since the world-war 
shook the foundations of every system, flashing vivid light 
upon their flaws and perilous rottenness. It is for the peoples 
of France, England, and America to say whether they will 
permit such conspiracy. It Is for them to give the word 
either for a useless attempt to prop up outworn oligarchy or 
for the free, unhindered growth of People's Rule, 

Indemnities and Bolshevism 

By Malcolm Lyon 

When the Prime Minister at Bristol talked about a 
£23,000,000,000 indemnity, and Germany being compelled to 
pay to the uttermost limit of her capacity, his unbridled 
irresponsibility contributed towards the spread of Bolshevism 
which can only be defeated by intelligence and responsibility. 
If we do not lose our heads it is within the power of civilisa- 
tion to help Russia out of her economic bog, even as the 
League of Nations may be expected to help Ireland out of her 
political bog; but if the first statesman of England talks 
incredible nonsense upon the question of indemnities, which is 
governed by economics, we shall be deemed incompetent to 
handle so difficult a problem such as Russia to-day presents. 
That Germany ought to pay twenty-three thousand 
millions, or even a far greater sum, is not in dispute. That is 
not the issue. The question is : What is the extreme amount 
that Germany can pay ? 

There is such universal ignorance surrounding the problem 
of transfer of value from one country to another that one is 
prepared to wager a considerable sum that more than half the 
members of the present House of Commons on an examina- 
tion paper strictly confined to the question of transfer of value 
would fail ignominiously. Were it otherwise, they would 
not be members of a Coalition Party pledged to make 
Germany pay for the cost of the war. 

Did Mr. Lloyd George explain to his audi^ence at Bristol 
that if a gold mine of fabulous wealth were discovered 
to-morrow in Germany and in three months' time Germany 
offered to pay in gold the full amount we claim, that this 
German gold would be as useless to us as Bolshevism is to 

Upon the indemnity question, as we have seen, the 
Coalition dope-phrase took this form : " Germany shall 
pay to the uttermost limit of her capacity." This sen- 
tence has a satisfying, all-comprehensive sound about 
it, and the electors marched out and voted for it. How 
many people realise that the problem of the indemnity 
payment is the' fower of England to fay? I pity any 


unfortunate Parliamentary candidate . who made the effort 
to explain this to his audience ! He would have been 
howled down; called a pro-German. The meeting would 
have ended in tumult and three cheers for Lloyd George. In 
effect, three cheers for unrelieved nonsense. 

The more civilised a people, the more it must suffer in 
war. The less can it receive. 

The Germans are brutes, and, had they won the war, they 
would have behaved as brutes, and they would have attempted 
the indemnity somehow. But we are civilised and not brutes, 
we suffer accordingly. 

For the immediate argument, we will put England's share 
of the indemnity at eight thousand millions (Mr. Bottomley 
said ten thousand millions and he was elected to get it), and 
we will consider the transfer of this value. The transfer must 
reduce our National Debt ; otherwise, it is not effective for its 
purpose. Now, there are only three methods or agencies 
possible which can be used to effect a transfer of value from 
one country to another : 

(i) Gold and interest or dividend — yielding invest- 
ments based upon securities existing outside the 
transferring country. 

(2) Services. 

(3) Commodities. 

Our share of the gold from Germany could not exceed 
forty millions sterling because it does not exist. And, for 
obvious reasons, if the chief function of gold is to form a 
basis for world currency and a large part of Europe is com- 
pelled to discontinue its employment for that purpose, gold 
will decline in value. Sixty per cent, of the world's produc- 
tion of gold is obtained from the British Empire. From 
this point of view alone it is to our interest that gold shall not 
cease to be used as a basis for national currency. In fact, 
British gold mining interests have recently appealed to the 
British Government for assistance because of the falling 
purchasing power of the gold they produce. Therefore, on 
balance, our imperial interests may benefit if we assist 
Germany to retain sufficient gold for the necessities of her 
monetary system. 

German foreign investments in neutral countries have 
already been hypothecated to a large amount ag^ainst advances 
received, and as regards the remainder the National Govern- 
ments concerned are bringing heavy claims against Germany 


for compensation in respect of U-boat losses, and their rights, 
whatever they may be, will certainly be exercised before we 
can commence to help ourselves; thus, our chances in this 
respect are extremely poor. 

In practice, therefore, it will be found that in the present 
case of^ Germany virtually the whole of the indemnity must be 
transferred in the form of services and commodities. 

What are the services that Germans can render to us in 
England if they are not allowed to live here ? Clearly none. 
What services can Germans living in Germany render to 
England? Sea-transport, banking, and insurance are the 
chief economic services that one country can perform for 
another. With her mercantile marine rightly taken from her 
and her banking and insurance companies banished from our 
midst, Germany cannot render us any services. Therefore, 
for all practical purposes, we are left with German 
commodities — i.e., raw materials, semi-raw materials, and 
manufactured articles — as the agency which must be 
employed in the transfer of the value. 

Now, these indemnity commodities which the British 
Government will receive must be sold — not given away — 
otherwise the National Debt will not be reduced. In other 
words, the British Government must find buyers. 

Most unfortunately — it is not the fault of the Prime 
Minister, but it is his fault that he did not explain these 
matters — Germany possesses no natural resources, excepting 
potash, timber (developed by afforestation), and beet sugar 
(grown under the heat of a Continental sun : per contra, our 
insular climate is against us), which are not obtainable in 
England. Silver, copper, cotton, wool, hides, oil, etc. ; semi- 
tropical and tropical products cannot come from Germany. 
Herein is our supreme difficulty. 

If Germany could send, for example, a large quantity of 
cotton annually, the British Government could find buyers 
without disturbing British trade. But even the Coalition 
cannot grow cotton in Germany. 

Coal offers considerable opportunities in the immediate 
present, because, owing to the disturbed state of the trade, 
the demand far exceeds the available supply. But coal is the 
only natural resource (excepting china-clay, which is of small 
value) that we can export; and, in order to stabilise our 
exchange, the export of coal must be pressed to the extreme 
limit. It would, therefore, appear that any annual transfer of 
value in excess of something in the neighbourhood of 


thirty-live to fifty millions sterling mu^t be effected in 
manufactured articles. 

In the sale of these manufactured articles the British 
Government will find itself in fierce competition with British 
and American manufacturers. That is to say, the Tariff 
Reformers — the ultra-patriotic wing of the Coalition — ^will be 
fighting not against Free Trade but slave trade; against 
the products of German war-convict labour. And this at a 
time when super-production here — which involves increased 
selling — is to help towards the payment for half a million 
new cottages ! 

Again, taking the cost of the war to us at eight thousand 
millions, the annual interest upon this amount at 5 per cent, 
is four hundred millions sterling. Unless, therefore, we 
receive from Germany more than four hundred millions 
sterling per annum, there will be no progress made in the 
payment of the cost of the war by Germany. 

Only an amount received from Germany in excess of four 
hundred millions can operate in reduction of our war debt. 

If the transfer of value is at the rate of six hundred 
millions per annum, Germany, given the time — say, thirty 
years — can repay us the cost of the war. Clearly, the 
Coalition does not expect a payment of four hundred 
millions per annum in perpetuity. It expects the cost of the 
war to be paid within a measurable period of time — say, fifty 
years. And, therefore, the Coalition expects an annual 
payment of five hundred millions as a minimum. 

Now, the combined wisdom of the Peace Conference 
cannot perform miracles, and before the month of February is 
out England will learn that a transfer of value, even to the 
amount of one hundred millions per annum — an amount 
exceeding the total value of our imports from Germany before 
the war — will present overwhelming difficulties, and that the 
amount actually transferable cannot much exceed seventy 
millions, if it can reach that figure. A transfer of value to 
this amount presupposes a Government in Germany so per- 
fectly organised as to be able to arrange for the necessary 
production of commodities and their surrender without pay- 
ment, always bearing in mind that the total responsibility of 
the German Government in this respect will be three times the 
amount actually to be dealt with for the account of England. 
Some experts have contended that this procedure would prove 
impossible, and that we should be prepared to pay anyhow to 
the extent of the wages due to German labour in the produc- 



tion of the coal, timber, potash, or beet sugar to be received. 
But in the case of coal and beet sugar, wages represent 
a large part of the cost, and under such a system the volume 
of commodities transferred must be greatly mcreased, and we 
are at once confronted with the insuperable difficulty which 
the British Government will experience in the realisation of 
the commodities — in their actual sale. 

If the German Government can arrange it, a transfer of 
value in the form, for example, of beet sugar is conceivable to 
the value of, say, twenty millions sterling. But if we pay the 
German Government the cost of labour engaged in the pro- 
duction of the sugar the indemnity transfer of value will be 
less than ten millions sterling, and at that figure the British 
Government may have reached the limit of its power of sale. 
Indeed, with this method in operation, anyone not taking three 
lumps of sugar in their tea would be dubbed a pro-German 
and indemnity-defeatist. 

From some quarters the proposal comes that neutral 
countries shall be asked to act as " exchange points." As an 
illustration, German sugar is to be sent to Sweden and 
Swedish wood-pulp and Swedish matches to us.'^ Will 
neutral countries act for us in this obliging way? For 
political reasons are they not likely to remain neutral ? Have 
they not large claims of their own to prefer against Germany ? 
In any case, recognising our difficulty, would not the neutral 
country seek to gain a considerable benefit out of the 
transaction, and thus reduce the value of the transfer ? 

As a general conclusion, it is conceded that there can be a 
transfer of value of a very limited nature in certain raw or 
semi-raw materials, provided the organisation of the German 
Government is sufficiently efficient, and it is suggested that the 
balance due must be transferred in manufactured articles. 

What kind of manoeuvring ground — how much scope will 
there be — for Coalition talent when we come to manufactured 
articles ? Let us consider our own position. 

The export of coal and manufactured articles, flus the 
value of the services we can render to people outside the 
United Kingdom — i.e., sea-transport (for the time being 
under a cloud), banking and insurance — the sum of these 
activities must largely help towards our social improvements — 
cottages, higher wages (if we are not careful, this will 
degenerate into a mere game in numbers, with the purchasing 
power remaining constant), shorter hours, improved commu- 
nications, etc. For it cannot be disputed that the dominant 


feature of the economic position of the United Kingdom is, 
apart from coal, the absence of our natural resources. 

Agriculture, with its two poor years in five, caused by 
climatic conditions beyond the control of the Coalition, is an 
impossible basis for our population '^f forty-eight millions. 
The economic activities based upon British natural resources 
could not support a population exceeding twenty-five 
millions. Twenty millions of our population are dependent 
upon our external trading relations. Therefore it is evident 
that the sale of German indemnity manufactured articles must 
not only lead to violent competition with British manufac- 
turers, but also gravely prejudice a vital national economic 

Further, the German Government, when manufacturing- 
articles for indemnity payment, Vv^ill find itself compelled in 
many cases to import the raw materials and to pay for 
them. Unless we, in our turn, paid Germany the cost of the 
raw material, Germany could not, under any conceivable 
circumstances, effect these necessary importations. And it 
follows that if Germany sent manufactured articles against 
payment of the bare cost of the material, plus the cost of 
labour (fixed at a low rate), the indemnity transfer value to us 
would certainly not exceed 20 per cent, of the total selling 
value,.. and, therefore, for example, manufactured articles to 
the value of one hundred millions sterling would only cause a 
transfer of value of twenty millions sterling. 

A distinction is to be drawn between the payment to 
England of an indemnity and the restoration of Belgium 
and Northern France. In the latter countries, Germany 
has produced a phenomenal situation which, to some extent, 
can be met by extra-economic methods. So far as they are 
still available, Germany can restore the stolen commodities, 
and she can replace with her own machinery and plant the 
contents of factories and workshops destroyed or dismantled 
during the war. This point can be pressed hard home. And 
it will be recognised that the supply of materials for rebuild- 
ing towns and villages does not present any difficulty so far 
as their realisation or sale is concerned. These materials will 
be used to fill up a war vacuum, to meet a stupendous demand 
as the sequel to gigantic destruction, 

On the other hand, the payment by Germany to France of 
the cost of the war is surrounded by all those difficulties which 
relate to a transfer of value as already explained. 

How far it will be possible for Germany to supply war 

G* 2 


convicts to work towards the restoration of Belgium and 
Northern France is not at all clear. After peace has been 
signed Germans will certainly be free to travel to the United 
States and neutral countries, and it is difficult to see under 
what principle of selection some Germans will find it possible 
to trav(^l to New York while others are compelled to give their 
services as war convicts to Belgium and France. 

They certainly ought to do this. But can the new 
democratic world establish a system of war slave labour? 

It comes to this. The Coalition is faced with insur- 
mountable difficulties with which they have saddled them- 
selves quite unnecessarily, because the public do not expect 
impossibilities from any Government. Having lacked the 
courage to state the true position at the General Election, 
and having made promises which cannot be performed, the 
Coalition will find itself overwhelmed by the disappointment 
and indignation of the whole country as soon as the proceed- 
ings at the Peace Conference reveal the actual facts and 
uncover the gross and unpardonable deception that has been 
practised upon the nation. And now, to add to our troubles, 
while the immediate necessity is to disentangle ourselves from 
the hideous muddle which is the unavoidable legacy of four 
years of war — four years of, perhaps, inevitable Trafalgar 
Square finance, with its corollary of drapers' and brewers' 
fortunes and riotous profiteering in paper, ships, and every 
imaginable industrial activity — Bolshevism is knocking at 
the door ! England is called upon to help Russia at a 
moment when England herself is largely blind to the perils 
with which she is confronted, and, therefore, in no mood to 
face and deal with stern realities. 

Bolshevism is bad thinking, and it can only be cured by 
good thinking. The present condition of affairs in certain 
parts of Russia is so unutterably sad, so inextricably confused, 
that one instinctively feels that a little kindly intelligence 
would go a long way if we could get contact — the impact of 
mind upon mind. Now, the League of Nations is at last 
heading in the right direction of a world's Magna Charta. 
which I advocated in this Review in 191 7. The American 
Secretary of State for War in a recent speech at Buffalo 
expressly said that the American Government hopes that a 
world's Magna Charta will emerge from the Peace Confer- 
ence; also, General Smuts' pamphlet upon a League of 
Nations is based upon trusteeship and charter. Therefore, 
we are moving towards political security, which is the neces- 


sary foundation of any social structure, however it may be 

The world's political charter cannot remove, but it will 
seek accommodation for prejudices of colour, race, and creed, 
and no problem will be excluded from tne function of a 
League of Nations when the League has been formed. 

This will represent the greatest political advance that has 
ever been attempted, and, born out of sacrifice and not com- 
promise, it will endure. Lenin and Trotsky — thinking badly, 
thinking fanatically, adopting the ruthless methods of the 
Old Testament, the methods of destruction — seek to alter the 
structure of world society by eliminating the property-owner 
or capitalist. They seek to cast out the god Capital : for 
without capitalists, however small they may be, we cannot have 
capital. Under the god Capital, as under our own God, so 
much human tragedy is enacted, so much removable hardship 
and suffering are borne, that reformers have often felt moved 
to cast out the god. In Russia, where to a large extent the 
land was the only property and formed the only capital of 
the capitalist, the temptation to remove the landowner was 
irresistible. Thus, in the passing of a single night, the god 
Capital was cast out and spat upon. The great god, with his 
impersonal authority that regulates with the minimum of 
personal friction the manifold activities of man, who can 
be propitiated to yield great and increasing harvests of social 
reform and whose power to function would not be lessened 
even if individual wealth became amenable to legislative 
limitations, this god was cast out. 

Lenin and Trotsky took the place of the impersonal 
authority of the god Capital, and Lenin and Trotsky sought 
to regulate the economic activities of the people of Russia by 
their personal decree. They attempted to do those things 
which Mr. Smillie and Mr. Macdonald and Mr. Snowden play 
at here with ecstatic abandonment. Millions of Russians are 
about to die and many more millions are suffering the agonies 
of want because Bolshevism is bad thinking. The Russian 
peasant wishes to exchange a part of his produce for imple- 
ments and clothes, using money as a medium of exchange. 
This is no longer possible, for the economic wheel has ceased 

Only the decree of the Russian Government backed by 
Russian bayonets can now compel the interchange. of commo- 
' dities. Such is the situation that has now been reached in 
large parts of Russia. What is to be done ? 



The mot (Vordre is for open diplomacy and public discus- 
sion in the political sphere. A public discussion of national 
economics by the greatest authorities we possess is still more 
urgent. The breakdown of the economic system, in England 
is near at hand. Take the case of the coal miners. They 
demand a six-hour day, no piece-work, and that the rate of 
wages to be paid shall be as decreed by the miners' organisa- 
tion. Market movements are ignored; the relation of 
supply to demand forgotten; and the god Capital is ruled 
out as beneath notice. It is conceivable that a world organi- 
sation such as the League of Nations could issue an edict 
limiting, upon humanitarian grounds, all work underground 
to six hours a day. That is accepted. Can this world 
organisation decree wages and compel services? Mr. 
Smillie's action invites and depends upon world response. 
He presents the root issue and provides the debating platform. 
He points either to the promised land or to the darkness and 
abyss of unutterable confusion. 

Capital, with its economic corollary, competition, does 
manage to revolve the economic wheel somehow— -however 
badly. The point is, can Mr. Smillie and the other members 
of his Forum hope to succeed at all ? We have seen that the 
export of coal will stabilise our exchange. What interest has 
this for Mr. Smillie if supply and demand exert no influence 
upon his policy of personal decree ? Let us at least under- 
stand where we are . You cannot function economically under 
the god Capital and yet cast out the god whenever you like, as 
Lord Devonport thought he could with potatoes. You can 
propitiate the god to yield social reform if you treat him with 
reverence. Alternatively, you can cast out the god as an 
unclean and detestable thing. In England we have not very 
much time to make up our minds which we are g^oing to do. 
Trotsky teaches men that they are the slaves of Capital. He 
bids them break their chains and become free men. He says, 
" Let the people rule." It sounds right. The power passes 
to the people. And rulers for or of the people duly appear. 
What happens then? The rulers discover that life is war, 
that economics mean war, that buyers and sellers spend their 
lives at war. And so Mr. Trotsky waves his wand of " per- 
sonal decree " (the market and market price no longer trouble 
either Trotsky or Smillie), and says, " Let there be peace. 
Stop thinking; cease fighting. I will decide." And there is 
peace. The economic wheel revolves no longer. For many 
it is the peace of death. 


Now let us bring our minds back to Mr. Smillie and his 
g-allant coal miners, and it will be seen that by their recent 
action they have rendered a signal service. They have 
sounded the alarm. They have awakened us from our Coali- 
tion dr^am of the contented workers of England, sound 
to the core and so impregnated with British sterling common- 
sense as to be proof against the fanatical and ignorant 
vapourins^s of the Russian Bolsheviki. The miners think the 
Bolsheviki are right. 

Now, coal is the breath of life to many of our industries, 
and the export of coal is of the highest importance to our 
national finances, owing to our heavy borrowing from the 
United States during the war. Will the Coalition recognise 
in this critical situation a golden opportunity for the applica- 
tion of new methods, so that the public may be able to get a 
real erip of the whole problem ? 

Will they summon a National Economic Council in order 
that the root issue raised by the miners may be debated under 
conditions of the fullest publicity? If Mr. Smillie is indeed 
leading us all towards the promised land, let us hasten to 
get there. 

The discussion at this Council can proceed upon non- 
political and purely economic grounds ; and the points raised 
and arguments adduced by those who take the view that 
Capital provides a mechanism for economic activities which 
we can only discard at the price of disaster and confusion can 
be replied to after careful thought by those who think that 
State decrees can not only replace that mechanism but add 
thereby to the sum of human happiness. 

To recapitulate, we have got to stop talking nonsense about 
indemnities. We have got to stop talking nonsense about 
nationalisation of this and that industry. We have, as prac- 
tical people, to come down to the roots of economics and to 
economic -mechanism, which, needless to say, are problems for 
the experts and not merely politicians, or, in any case, matters 
for open and public debate between the interests concerned. 

The sooner that public discussion is started, the better 
it will be for England. 

A New Order ? 

By Austin Harrison 

Though the delays have been ominous and even criminal, 
and the swarms of diplomatists, officials, secretaries, detec- 
tives, hangers-on, and pundits have far exceeded the regal 
paraphernalia of the worst days of secret diplomacy, the great 
Congress which is to give to the world a new order or fail 
dismally, has opened auspiciously, and there is real reason for 
hope. President Wilson's consultative passage among the 
Peoples vitally concerned proved a veritable triumph of 
democratic instinct, and met with a spontaneous response. 
The image of a cloistered professor speaking by the copy- 
book has vanished. European democracies have seen a man 
and sensed a reality. No longer is it the correct thing to jeer 
at the League of Nations. The phrase has grown into an 
idea ; men talk about it eagerly, intelligently. It moves. The 
intelligence of the world is literally focused on the friction 
of mind at Versailles; on the representatives of the nations 
who, for the first time in history, are called upon to think and 
build, not as masters, but as the " servants " of an articulate 
and a collective democracy. We now know that President 
Wilson has not come to Europe to decree, but to induce. 
The Fourteen Points are not to be regarded as a Mosaic Law; 
they represent the bases of discussion. America has clearly 
no desire to dominate; her aim is harmony. The new 
morality, if such there is to be, is not to be enforced ; it is to 
evolve co-operatively. The sanction of the New World is 
not to over-ride the sanction of the Old World ; quintessen- 
tiallv it is to support it, to help make it cosmic in its respon- 
sibility and to define its application. Above all, the 
Congress is not to be feudal or diplomatic; its purpose is to 
be democratic, that is to say, its function and derivative 
powers are to be universal. 

All this is new and so healthy. Instead of personality, 
principle will be the dominant and the root of debate. The 
idea of the League will take precedence of the problems 
which thus will have to be discussed contingently, not as 
isolated questions of interest or policy. And, instead of the 


old method and attitude of rival antagonisms, the new method 
will be one of continuous consideration, with a view rather to 
the whole than to its parts. In a word, in place of the 
Bismarckian spirit of " healthy selfishness," the spirit will take 
the form of healthy co-operativeness, upon which principle 
alone the League of Nations can be constructed with any hope 
of permanency or in any way differing from a mere pinnacle 
of power such as the old Holy Alliance. 

I do not believe that there is any cause for mistrust of the 
clause which so vitally concerns us, known as the Freedom of 
the Seas. Here America has no intention to dictate or to 
force an issue. The question is primarily one of world- 
security, and so of world-governing principles, and as we are 
actually in control on this question and America is not nation- 
ally interested in controverting or grudging us that control, the 
problem is not that of power, but the responsibility of that 
power in the new conditions of a co-operative order in which 
application must obviously rest upon a basis of common 
sanction. That is the point. If our interest is security the 
new order must be guaranteed a similar security. Who 
actually carries out this g^overning or police work is immaterial 
to the principle. It is the principle which matters On this 
point, as between America and ourselves, there would seem no 
just ground for apprehension. 

Let those who doubt consider the stupendous new fact, the 
outstanding issue of the war — the reunion of the British and 
American Peoples. If the war produces nothing beyond 
that consummation it will have been worth while, and mankind 
will be the richer for it. No sane man can dispute this. The 
long historic tension between the English-speaking races — 
a tension which tended over Ireland and our sleepy 
insularity to grow before 1914, and upon which the Germans 
based their entire philosophy of force and bid for European 
dominion — ^has come to an end in the brotherhood of arms, 
through the inspiration of a common humanity. Henceforth 
we and the Americans are one in sense and spirit of civilisation. 
We are friends, brother-soldiers, speaking the same tongue, 
breathing the same life, meaning the same things. Can any 
man believe that this great reunion will again be jeopardised, 
will again be suffered by the two democracies to lapse into 
discord ? The thought perishes naturally. It is unthinkable. 
What, then, is there to fear from America? There is, and can 
be, nothing. Our joint historical course is prescribed in a 
now public responsibility. A common voice proclaims this 


harmony of design and manifestation. Our roots have come 
back to us. In the friendship of America, Britain with her 
Empire receives her historical justification. 

We go, then, to the Congress morally and politically in 
unison, one may truly say, with the cultural purpose of 
America,^ and what our twin civilisation stands for must 
influence the world. Our position, therefore, is of an abso- 
lute cosmic sis^nificance. We cannot decide to adhere rigidly 
to the old order, to feudal conceptions of the rights of nation- 
hood, to conditions which are recognised as anachronistic. 
And the fact is the key of the Congress. For we are to-day 
the supreme power in Europe. Our attitude, thus, will be 
decisive. But that attitude is conditioned, because sanc- 
tioned, by the New World which took up arms to redress the 
balance, not of power, but of life. Upon us must depend the 
responsibility of achievement, because we alone are in the 
position to remove the old European order and breathe into 
it the life of opportunity. And any other policy would be 
self-destructive. It would be tantamount to the refusal of 
our inherent civilisation, to the nesfation of our Anglo-Saxon 
victory. We hold, therefore, the balance. We lose all if we 
do not hold it. It is our destinv- Deliberately to run 
counter to it would spell not only disaster to ourselves, but 
to Anelo-American reason. 

The real difficulties, even in so momentous a revolution as 
that implied in a League of Nations or co-operative order, are, 
therefore, more of attitude than of principle, seeing that the 
foundations of the principle exist in the controlling partner- 
ship of the two Powers who have won the war. All will 
depend upon that joint adherence to principle. The condi- 
tions are peculiarly favourable. It may justlv be said that 
the sanction for change is in advance of the conditions. The 
world is ready for a great new principle of relationship, of 
which President Wilson represents, as it were, the world's 
expectation. Unlike all former Coneresses of Peace, the 
one at Paris will find itself in the propulsive grip of opinion, 
of forces resident in the Peoples. It will not. and cannot, 
degenerate into a secret conclave of interest, bargain, and 
intrigue. For outside the democracies are thinkine aloud, 
are vibrant with intention, are consciously the ultimate sanc- 
tion. What is done at Paris will h?ve to be approved, or 
there will be no ratification. For the first time Demos will sit 
in the chair. 

The chief business of the Congress will be the acceptance 


of the principle of co-operation, and once this is established 
the difficulties should not prove overwhelming. In itself this 
denotes the new order. Hitherto nations have thouorht purely 
competitively, and so in isolated antagonisms. Never has 
there been a collective or international reason of State. The 
idea has been scouted as visionary and jejune, as unpatriotic; 
but to-day that is no lono^er the case. Men recognise to-day 
that strategic peaces lead to war, not to security ; that selfish 
diplomacy is non-constructive; that conscription implies war. 
Europe, stricken to the ground, can hardly revert to the old 
militarist order without incurring the risk of almost inevitable 
destruction. The reign of personal rule, 6i oligarchic 
imperialism, has been found out. The alternative is oppor- 
tunity and the safeguards of opportunity. This implies a 
new international attitude : the attitude of sacrifice as the 
earnest of its reality, the attitude of universalism as the 
pledee of its continuity. 

True, the cynic may scoff. He does not believe that 
nations will change; he does not believe in change. He will 
say, " How can you be patriotic if you are to be 
international ? " But that is simply because he has not 
understood the lessons of the war, which, even militarily, are 
essentially co-operative. Objection of this kind is superficial, 
because it ignores the alternative and refuses life, the law of 
which is change. Such an attitude to-day scarcely counts, 
though it may prove an initial difficulty. On principle it is 
already discounted. We go, then, to Paris to find the ways 
and means for the application of the principle of opportunity. 

So far as the enemy is concerned, we have the precedent 
of Waterloo. The peace we made with France was, for that 
age, curiously constructive ; we neither crippled her nor in any 
way sought to impede her legitimate national development; 
we simply exorcised the Napoleonic spirit. That will be our 
concern with the Prussian spirit. We can hardly, after a 
century of progress, revert to medieval penalisation of the 
vanquished, nor, in the spirit of the new order, could we 
justify such procedure. On principle we have to get away 
from the soldiers' or strategic conception of " security," which 
provides, of course, no security at all, but only an inducement 
for more war. Our thought will have to be co-operative. To 
crush the Germans, to ring them in with so-called "buffer" 
States, from strategic motives, to stifle their national oppor- 
tunity, would be merely the old way of "keeping the peace," 
which assuredly would lead in time to Armageddon the 


second. We do not need a League of Nations to make a 
peace of that nature, nor could any true League of Nations 
repose upon such a basis. At Paris our function will be the 
long view — justice ; will be the new world view — opportunity; 
will be the democratic view — sincerity. To treat the Germans 
in 1 9 19 y^^orse than we treated France in 181 5 would be 
contrary to the spirit of the age, contrary to our own laws of 
civilisation so signally illustrated in the reversion by 
Campbell-Bannerman of the Milner imperialist peace made 
with the Boers; which wise vindication of justice may be said 
to have saved Europe in this war. 

One of the main difficulties will unquestionably be 
the rebirth of the Nationalities that are to be called 
into being; their governance, their economic potentiality, 
their confines, their aims, and their limitations. The 
danger will lie in the temptation to Balkanise Europe 
with the multifarious unsatisfied vanities and ambitions 
inseparable from the re-formation of young nations, some 
of them apparently to be fashioned out of the dim 
paees of history. This reconstitution of the map of Europe 
will assuredly tax the League of Nations severely, both 
as regards principle and its application. It will be diffi- 
cult to avoid the strategic thought, certainly historians will 
differ. To begin with, there will be no common equation 
among these Peoples of mentality or civilisation. The more 
the nations of Europe, clearly the greater the problem of their 
co-operation. The problem will be doubly complicated by 
clashinof issues of creed, race, and economics. The map will 
not suffice, nor can history determine the new demarcation. 
If self-determination is to be the principle, we may discover 
that in various cases it carries with it an economic disability. 
The re-mapping of Europe must be an extraordinarily difficult 
and dangerous task — only, indeed, conceivable on the 
co-operative basis of the League of Nations, only relatively 
justifiable as an experiment in conditions which ensure the 
application of an accepted governing principle. 

It will be the same with the annexationist claims of 
imperialism. The euphemism disannexation will hop 
plausibly on the table ; Victory will tender its privileges ; the 
soldier will demand his pound of flesh ; and the capitalist will 
demand his "returns." There will be passion to counter, 
hate to reason with, vindictiveness to overcome, cupidity to 
restrain, fear — the fear of the men, particularly the old men, 
of the old order — to correct. Only principle can aspire to 


meet such conflicting forces, to prevail over them, to compose 
and induce them to harmony. Yet principle is the new voice 
in the Congress which differentiates it from all others in 
history. Rightly, it will be placed first upon the table, 
thereby associating all calculations and decisions with the 
new thought. Like the inkpot, it will be there before each 
member; in time it will become the inkpot into which all pens 
will be dipped. Of decree there will be none. Insensibly 
the new thing will be present, checking, correcting, inspiring, 
(may we hope ?) governing. Thus the Congress will become 
a " demonstration " controlled by the outside will of the 

This is the central fact at Paris, which politicians will 
ignore at their peril. There can be no Talleyrand cynicism, 
no Bismarckian egotism, no secret treaty Caesarism; politi- 
cians will find themselves acquiring the Wilson spirit — that 
is, they will have to think internationally, constructively, 
imaginatively. Some of them won't understand at first, some 
won't want to understand ; but that will not matter. Behind 
them there stands the enlightened thought of the emancipated 
democracies, and behind that phalanx of order there looms 
the Moloch of Bolshevism or chaos. 

All this makes for progress. The Balance of Power 
doctrine will, no doubt, die hard, professional historians may 
seek to uphold it, but as a doctrine it is doomed because there 
no longer exists a European balance, and such a balance can 
only be restored with the aid of America, who expressly 
dissociates herself from the compact. And that is root. 
Mere power thinking will find itself old-fashioned, for every 
question will have to be discussed on the principle of the new 
order, which itself will constitute the power formulated ulti- 
mately in the League of Nations, in which, of course, all 
nations will connect. There can be no question about this 
universalism of control and benefit. All must be in the 
League or there will be no League. The thing must be a 
whole ; it cannot be a Frankenstein after the model of the old 
imperialistic condominiums; and once this basic condition 
receives acceptance the spirit of the new order will have 
been born. 

Again and again in this Review the nature of this spirit 
has been expounded ; once more it must be insisted that the 
supreme need is of a Declaration of Rights or charter of 
international responsibility and principle. For the League, 
however satisfactory on paper, will be stillborn unless it does 


whole work — unless, that is, it sets itself up not only as a 
supreme authority of power and arbitration, but also has the 
right to assume responsibility as a continuous tnechanism of 
ad-justinent and regulation. This will be the test of success. 
Any Peace Conference can settle with a defeated foe, can 
punish and alter boundaries, can play the soldier-lawyer — 
with what results we have all learnt to estimate in the death 
struggle of the last four years. The Paris Conference must 
achieve far more than that. If its immediate function is the 
making of peace, its true business is responsibility. Here it 
will have to think in the Napoleonic way, only with a view to 
peace instead of war, and in this task the logic and intellectual 
precision of the French should prove invaluable. The danger 
will be a jerry machine, a Court which has no life because it 
has no resiliency and no continuity. Now, it is clear that if 
the League cannot assume responsibility for legitimate cases 
of national and imperial difficulty — such are the growth of 
peoples, excess population as exists in Japan, economic dis- 
abilities, questions of interdependence such as Ireland, and 
the whole field of the rights of imperialism, possessive, 
economic, and tributary (such, again, the control or 
monopoly of natural resources) — the League will fail as 
time obliterates the decisions of the hour and with the 
mutability of things the energies of men and of nations 

Yet the very difficulty of the problem is of good augury, 
because at once we recognise that the basis and composition 
of the machinery must necessarily be cosmic, not merely 
European; must, therefore, span the universe — that or 
nothing. Either we advance to a truly co-operative condition 
of international relationship or we return to the old order, in 
which case statesmanship will have to confess to moral 
bankruptcy and the world will revert to militarism. 

Yet this is precisely what, even with the best intentions, 
Europe can hardly do — and survive. There is high motive, 
therefore, to think internationally : the motive of ordinary self- 
preservation. All the same, only sincerity can carry us 
beyond the regions of hope ; only the conscious intention of 
the Peoples can compel a common attestation of principle 
governed by the elasticity of life. Thus, the Congress will 
have to consider the unsatisfied ambitions of a power such as 
Japan ; to settle on principle how she is to meet the difficulties 
of excess population, and where an outlet may be found for 
her other than that obtainable — by the old way of force. 

A NEW ORDER? 167, 

Militarism, after all, is only the instrument of policy, and 
hitherto only the efficiency of any particular militarism 
troubled the nations. To make war on efficiency merely 
would be idle, except as a temporary expedient. Far more is 
needed. Had the Tsar, tor instance, been able to 
Prussianise his subjects, Armageddon would have been an 
anti-Russian war, not a German one. The problem is 
deeper than that of nationality, infinitely more complex than 
the correction of system, which is only the matter of degree ; 
it pivots on attitude or spirit, which alone, as the genius of 
man, leads on to progress. And that will be the acid test 
— the spirit of sacrifice. Are the nations ready for the prin- 
ciple of equity in human relationships? Can they win to 
an equation of law founded on opportunity? In a word, is 
civilisation prepared to coalesce, to make war a common 
responsibility — that is, to make peace a common utility f 

At least we are ready to attempt the feat, and with that 
registration we enter the Paris Conference. I think we shall 
move to the principle. The problem then will consist in the 
application, and this will depend upon our machinery. We 
may not at first be able to obtain the goodwill necessary, the 
sincerity, and. the constructiveness indispensable, for law and 
authority will not suffice in the absence of parity of sanction 
and self-sacrifice; and to this equatorial line of agreement it 
may be difficult to attain. 

That is why power in the new order must be a world 
responsibility not an isolated privilege. We had something 
of the kind in the white man's punitive expedition against 
the " Boxers " of China. There seems no reason why the 
common interest underlying that force should not become 
universal. Provided the interest of control reposed upon 
just principles, controlled by the fluctuations of common 
sanction. After all, war has only flourished as an idea on 
account of its utility. Deprive war of that utility — of 
conquest and gain — and war would be recognised as a nega- 
tion, as actually has been the case in this great upheaval. 
If, then, the victors at Paris claim the traditional spoils of 
war, the idea of the utility of war will be perpetuated. The 
vanquished will merely sigh over defeat. Militarists will 
have been proved right. War, as a biological necessity, will 
have forfeited neither its virtue nor its panache. Intellec- 
tually, the only fault of the Germans will have been that they 
were beaten. 

And this w^ill be the corner-stone of the new order. We 


shall not turn the corner with a soldiers' or strategic peace, 
we shall crash into the slough of the old or militarist order. 
The temptation to Ludendorff the Hun, to hamstring him will 
be strong, yet it must be resisted by Anglo-American vision 
or we shall never build a Napoleonic high-road to freedom 
and correction, which are the pillars of the new order. The 
German problem of peace was her geographical peril of war. 
Our busmess will be to remove that peril by international 
control and so to provide her with peace. The war was taken 
up by us and America for this business of correction. We 
shall have corrected nothing if Europe sinks back to conscrip- 
tion, or if one half emerges to fatten at the expense of the 
other. From correction we have to pass to the principle of 
opportunity or life. The conditions of Peace are thus 
indissolubly bound up with the principles of the League of 
Nations, which, in reality, means cosmic responsibility for 
change and for no change. Peace, then, is the League of 
Nations, or there will merely result another armed truce. In 
all territorial readjustments, reclamations, and creations this 
simple truth will have to be the determining instrument, and 
without any doubt this ingestion in the European mosaic of 
nations will prove the most dangerous task before the 
Congress; because historically, ethnographically, econo- 
mically, and politically the most fraught with difficulties. On 
any true basis of nationality and self-determination, Europe 
might lose its present character altogether. On logic we 
shall be faced with the eccentricities of German and Low 
German; even Pan-Germanism. In Poland alone Europe has 
a full-blooded fighting problem of the Alsace-Lorraine type, 
and here we shall be delving back far into history with results 
which would seem incalculable. Three territorial excisions 
are required for the complete restoration of Catholic 
Poland. Now, a policy of bolstering-up the small by 
weakening big nations contains all the elements of first-class 
trouble, unless we have League of Nations law; and if the 
policy is merely to militarise Poland in order to constrict 
Germany, then we need not worry over conscription here : we 
shall have to have it. To the student of Europe, Polish 
restoration seems to lay the foundations of a hundred years' 
ferment, varied only by war. The thing is insensate, except 
under the co-operative order. When we come to the 
Dalmatian coast, to Southern Europe, with the segregate 
risorgimentos of Greek, Roumanian, Czech, and Tribal 
Slavdom, the professor alone can aspire to wisdom, and 


perhaps he only — in his library. In this connection The 
Morning Post published the other day a map of National 
"aspirations"; it looks like a Chinese puzzle. If the 
Conference proceeds on those lines it will terminate in a 
Chinese wall. 

We shall have to be quick, for the major part of Europe 
is in chaos, and chaos waits for no man. The need of peace 
is pressing-; there is no excuse for further delay. Peace 
mi^ht have been made already, and would have been but for 
the elections here and the spectacular circumstance every- 
where, for there is no question of enemy obiection. We have 
but to asffee and to impose. Why the Blockade has been 
continued all these weeks remains a mystery. At once it 
should be removed. And at once a measured joint policy 
of intellisfence should be adopted towards Russia — who at 
least can claim the distinction of havine repudiated all 
annexations and so morally aligned herself with the new 
order. At present we have neither policy nor an attitude. 
The Congfress will have to deal with this question, a demo- 
cratic one. It cannot associate itself with the idea of 
Monarchical restoration, for the world would shudder. The 
continuance of military operations in part collusion with the 
Monarchical aim has become a world question which threatens 
to assume an international class aspect, and on this point the 
Congress will have to prove its sincerity or the whole fabric 
will be imperilled. Failure to gaupfe the profundities of this 
problem may easily bring the whole League of Nations to 
ruin. The requirements are the truth. Till recently we were 
told that Lenin was a German agent, yet it was Bolshevism 
which refused Germany corn and supplies, thereby greatly 
accelerating her debacle. We cannot have it both ways. 
We cannot blockade Russia on any principle of the right of 
self-determination. Here light would seem imperative.* 

We start then with these assets. The League is recog- 
nised as a cultural necessity, which the masses mean to 
make a reality, and in its presiding genius Europe greets a 
new order. The work to be done is happily free from senti- 
ment, religious bias or interested motive, and in no wise is 
there just cause for fear of dictation or imposition. As the 
foundation we have principle, thus greatly simplifying correc- 
tion and rectification ; as safeguard we have publicity, thereby 

* President Wilson's appeal to Russia (January 23rd) should greatly 
facilitate things, at least stop the expedition urged by the French against their 
former Allies. Labour will see to that also. 


eliminating personality or politics. In lieu of a secret 
Congress with all the power within, the real power lies 
without. Instead of Fear as the master-mind, compelling a 
fear or power peace, we are to try confidence. Against the 
doctrine of balance we have the practical ideal of oppor- 
tunity offered by the New World. In place of the strategics 
of isolation we have the dynamics of co-operation. The 
Conference will not be an arena of diplomatists seeking 
separate and aggregate advantages, nor is it an assizes of 
war; first and foremost it is a convention of democracy met 
together to create a charter of international responsibility — 
nothing less will serve to ensure its application. In 
M. Clemenceau and President Wilson the world salutes the 
base of Republicanism. 

Shall we fail, or, rather, can we succeed ? The answer is 
that the result will depend largely upon the " back," as it did 
during war. Our British representation at the Congress is 
distressingly disappointing, consisting of rigid Tory politi- 
cians, and of one who clearly has become a Tory.* This is all 
the more unfortunate, as, despite the mandate of a flag 
election, Britain is admitted to be more truly democratic and 
progressive than at any period in her history. That is really 
the energy. In truth the League of Nations will be born 
outside — in the homes, in the cities, in the armies. Versailles 
will be the clearing-house ; It cannot shrink into a Bastille of 
war and of the old order. The Press or public forum will 
make or mar the League. The politicians at Paris will have 
to be very careful of their reputations. 

For us, the issue is of tremendous importance, for the 
simple reason that failure to obtain a League of Nations 
peace must carry with it conscription here, and probablv 
within the Empire. A power peace will mean that we shall 
have to provide the force to uphold it. With equal certainty 
a policy of strategic control would necessitate conscription. 
So much is indisputable. Our diplomatic business, then, is to 
obtain the freedom of statesmanship, to lead, to work "hand 
in hand with America. 

The real need is to create from the foundations, not to 
superimpose from the top, as in the old way. And this will 
form the chief difficulty of politicians. Yet unless they build 
in this new way they will not cross the Rubicon of war ; they 
will find themselves fighting over particularlst ambitions, over 

* Mr. Barnes, now severed from Labour, must, as a Coalitionist, be 
labelled with the majority. 


frontiers and forts, over the imponderabilia of secret 
diplomacy. The only chance is to proceed on principle. 
Britain and America control — that is the outstanding power 
factor in the Congress. We have not to think Europeanly, 
but cosmically. The twin English-speaking civilisations 
have to act as the Napoleon of construction in the spirit of 
their responsibility for winning the war. That means they 
have to win the peace. They must put down all particularism, 
cut out root and branch all would-be imperialism of the old 
order and all reactionary tendencies. 

Let us remember — English is the new diplomatic language. 
We must speak English at Paris. It is the English argument 
that the world will need, if only because of this brutal, incon- 
testable truth, that England and America literally control the 
entire economic position, and there can be no security, political 
or economic, without our twin sanction. What politicians say 
will not decide, whatever compact, truce, or settlement they 
may consider they have arrived at. Economics control. 
Therefore, financially, America controls. That is our cue 
and — justice. We have but to hold to it, and whatever the 
political groupinsfs and eccentricities of the position, they will 
be flv-blown. Elemental forces control, not man. Men can 
merely contrive an adjustment. If, then, the men at Paris 
turn out to be pygmies, the elemental forces at work will 
remove them. That is the situation. At Paris man- 
kind stands at the points of world regeneration or — -world 

The Congress opened with a grave blunder, which can 
only serve to accentuate the suspicion with which European 
Labour regards the League of Nations as a central controlling 
aeency.* Publicity should have been the fundamental prin- 
ciple of procedure, and we may be sure that Britain and 
America were not the nations which demanded secrecy. If, 
therefore, they ceded to this old-fashioned diplomatic ruse, 
the reason was, no doubt, politically sound. It was, of course, 
to save the politicians of other countries from exi)osure. to 
cover up their insincerities, to let them down easilv. The 
question is: Will this secrecy matter? I am inclined to 
think not, because the demand for it shows already a 
change of attitude, proves that politicians realise that thev 
are not convened to scramble for the " fruits ," but to applv 

* The idea of a League of Control constitutes a grave danger where and 
when applied to economics. It is to be hoped the President will once more 
save us from that variety of the Holy Alliance. 


themselves to responsible reconstruction. The Press cannot 

Their subserviency has been treated accordingly, and they 
will swallow this insult to their honesty and intelligence with- 
out a murmur ; they have done so, in fact. Again, that will not 
matter. The real question is whether secrecy will enable the 
politicians to revert to the old feudal methods or help them to 
slough their medieval skins and obtain a new attitude. Rows 
in the Press would not facilitate this process of crystalli- 
sation, and so, no doubt, the French considered that the 
Turkish bath had better be taken in privacy. For, of course, 
the Press will know what goes on, will ascertain all the diffi- 
culties, will always be able to break down any dangerous 
political adhesions, for if the politicians are to have secrecy to 
save them from exposure, exposure will remain the legitimate 
weapon of democracy, operating in the traditional fashion of 
the *' scoop." All which may be dreadfully silly, yet neces- 
sary in the heated atmosphere of the time, and only shows the 
innate difficulties. The "scoop," then, will remain as the 
Damocles sword of the Conference. 

American and British journalists will certainly understand 
the use of this weapon, and the fact will bring them down, too, 
to a sense of the reality and the extraordinary responsibility of 
the situation. The real work will be done in private conver- 
sations. Secrecy will whet the appetite of the public and 
stimulate world keenness. And that also is useful. It is 
the beginning that counts. If politicians need a cubicle to 
change their clothes in, well, the world will iudsfe them all 
the more critically wHen somewhat bashfully they appear 
publicly in the apparel — of spring. 

On the whole, I believe that at Paris Europe will somehow 
step out of the canvas of martial politics into the light and 
opportunity of the family or responsible order. Otherwise — 
night, Bolshevism, and deepening chaos. 



Far Away and Long Ago. By W. H. Hudson. Dent and Sons, Ltd. 
155. net. 

This book of reconstruction of early life and its impressions was 
conceived, the author narrates, on a sick-bed, where, as he lay, the far- 
off days of his childhood came back to him with poignant intensity. The 
result is a charming picture of a boy brought up among the pampas of 
South America, studying animals, revelling in the joys of nature, not 
learning much from schoolmasters yet absorbing the wild life of that 
time, partly conscious of and partly mystified by the spirituality of atmo- 
sphere that he found there. Clearly Mr. Hudson has sought to be 
truthful and nowhere is there any attempt at sensation or self-glorifica- 
tion. With a religious sincerity he has recalled the past and so com- 
piled a remarkable book of child life, which to the boy was evidently one 
continuous romance and revelation. Mr. Hudson writes a noble style, 
and it is, perhaps, worthy of note that he and R. B. Cunninghame- 
Graham both drew their inspiration from the Spanish of South America. 
He, is a true hidalgo of letters, and in this tome we understand how he 
came to know birds and animals so well, whence his animism derived, 
why he is so unique in his art expression. This is a beautiful work. 
It is the man. 

Mothers and Children. By Frank Danby. Collins. 65. net. 

This is a moving book of half-finished studies which show how inade- 
quately " Frank Danby " was appreciated as a literary force in her time. 
The authoress was known as a woman of many parts. Drawing-rooms 
knew her ; in fiction she made a quite personal mark ; she was, as it 
were, a public woman and she was the mother of Gilbert Frankau, whose 
Byronic poem of school days astonished us just before the war. But few 
knew how deeply she thought, that below the glitter of the society 
woman the true artist lived and worked. A^ her son writes, few can 
read the little thing, called "Gerald," and nou feel moved to tears. In 
its way, it is a little gem of real woman's expression — the mother; the 
theme dominates all these studies. We see in them the confession of a 
soul, the genuine outpouring of a great heart tempered with the cynicism 
and wisdom of the world. Here we can understand the difficulties of 
the woman-writer who is also a mother, yet it is interesting to find that 
the artist pays homage rather to the home. The book is a document of 
human nature and of a remarkable personality. 


The Three Pennys. By Joseph Hergesheimer. Heinemann. 6s. 

This American novel is based structurally on the three generations 
idea in one of Arnold Bennett's dramatised books. He opens with the 
Penny family in the times of the vast virgin forests and the establish- 


ment of the Penny forge ; then we pass to the iron period, finally to the 
steel or modern day. In each case the main interest is centred on the 
woman that Penny is to marry and so we have a triple bill of love, which 
certainly adds to the excitement. Here is a typical American work. 
The author has clearly no long generations of English behind him, and 
at times he seems to get congested. Yet he has resource, breadth, and 
that rugged strength of writing which, if not classical, conveys in 
characteristic American manner the intensity, the swiftness, the prlmi- 
tiveness of America and her development. In this sense the book is very 
interesting, for we have no such grandiose foundations to build novels 
upon, and to Americans it is history. It is a novel of chronicle, like one 
of Galdos' works on Spain. Outside of America men will find it diffi- 
cult to pronounce judgment upon a work so distinctly not European, 
but it fascinates, and succeeds in creating atmosphere and personality. 


The Millennium? By Sir Ian Hamilton. Arnold. 25. 6d. 

General Hamilton has summarised his thoughts on the new order 
in a brilliant medley of martialism, spirituality, and common sense. His 
counsel is : Kill conscription. Yet clearly the soldier cannot get away 
from his last, for his philosophy seems to end in a vista of nations 
forbidden to have conscription, but free, if they so please, to fight it 
out, as if war could be made a game controlled by rules, such as 
boxing. This surely is not philosophic. Logically, it would reduce 
war to a controlled duel, which cannot be. You might get a nation 
who would not become soldiers, another which would be three parts 
soldiers. No, the League of Nations is not that. Yet, unquestionably, 
conscription is the root evil to banish, and perhaps Sir Ian wisely sees 
that, once men got to that point, the rest would be easy. In any case, 
this is a real contribution to the subject. The thing sparkles with 
things well said. It is quite a tour de force of argument and presenta- 
tion. Free from cant and officialism, the little work reveals an honest 
mind grappling with a problem of life which, as a soldier, himself 
scarred with war, he finds it temperamentally hard to believe in, still 
less to promote; which, however, as a man, he intellectually cannot 
ignore or depreciate. Thus, even as the soldier styles his book The 
Millennium? with an interrogation, he recognises the necessity of change; 
and he hopes. 


New Poems. By Robert Louis Stevenson. Chatto and Wlndus. 
65. net. 

The war years have been remarkably fruitful in the discovery of 
unfamiliar fragments from the Great Departed of literature; so much 
so that it now only remains for the Victory spring to crown the list with 
some abandoned comedy (using the word, of course, in the sense of 
unfinished !) of Marlowe, or a scenario from Stratford-on-Avon. At 
present, however, the latest find remains these poems of R. L. S., which 
we owe, in their collected form, to the Bibliophile Society of Boston, 
from whose privately printed edition they are now transferred to the 

BOOKS 175 

familiar dark covers of Messrs. Chatto and Windus. One may cer- 
tainly agree with Mr. Lloyd Osbourne in calling the collection "extra- 
ordinarily interesting," even though the individual pieces composing it 
are of very unequal vs^orth, and hardly likely to add much to the fame 
of their writer. How far, for example, second thoughts can better 
improvisation is conspicuously shown in this early version of since- 
famous lines : — 

" Bury me low and let me lie 
Under the wide and starry sky. 
Joying to live, I joyed to die, 
Bury me low and let me lie." 

Certainly a book that all Stevensonians should read, and for which all 
collectors of him will find a place upon their shelves ; though none but 
the simple enthusiast for "my idol right or wrong" will pretend that 
most of its contents could not have been as well written by a feebler 
hand. . A. E. 


On Society. By Frederic Harrison. Macmillan and Co. 12s. net. 

In this compendium of Positivist teaching, Mr. Frederic Harrison 
makes, as it were, a valedictory gesture of faith and principle. Here we 
find Mr. Frederic Harrison of the 'eighties and 'nineties; the chaplain- 
philosopher of Newton Hall ; the Positivist ; the early champion of trade 
unionism, the stout opponent of imperialism, the Home Ruler, the 
spiritual "brother" of John Morley, the individualist, the controver- 
sialist; the professor intolerant of examinations; the worshipper of 
Auguste Comte — almost, one might say, the English pioneer of that 
religion of humanity now engaging the minds of the world in President 
Wilson's League of Nations. "Live for others" was Comte's creed, 
and the conception roused Mill's bile. What would Mill say to-day 
could he talk to Mr. Wilson; what Comte? It was the interpretation 
of this doctrine which gave Mr. Frederic Harrison his wide range of 
discussion. In essence a school rather than a sect. Positivism under 
Mr. Harrison became an intellectual tabernacle of thought and actuality, 
conspicuously foreign politics. His annual addresses at Newton Hall were 
for a long time an institution in the national life ; they were awaited like 
a pronouncement by the Prime Minister, and we can re-read the speci- 
mens given in this volume to-day with unfeigned delight. Mr. Harrison 
seems to have become somewhat distant in these years of war. He 
accepts humanism as a preferable term to Positivism; clearly he recog- 
nises that Comte was rather an inspirer than an exact creator. Mr. 
Harrison offers this book as his testament. It is the record of a splendid 
life interest, a noble battle for a principle, the expression of a fine, 
virile intellect. A great public man, Victorian by instinct, a literary- 
historian, teacher, critic, journalist, lawyer, and professor, Mr. Harrison 
for decades held a position such as no man can remotely hold to-day, 
centred in the religion to which he dedicated his life. We read again 
with affection. We think of the man fighting his many fights for free- 
dom, for others. How he hated Bismarck ! How he loved France ! 
How he loathed jingoism ! How he seemed to stand always alone, yet 
always the friend ! Well, it is all here, and we wish Mr. Harrison 
could give it us all over again in the coming years. 



The Dardanelles Campaign. By H.. W. Nevinson. Nisbet. i8s. 

Thjs is probably the best work that has appeared on the briUiant 
but luckless Dardanelles campaign, which to-day is almost forgotten. 
Yet it was one of the epics of the war and might have ended the war. 
It failed because its importance and military difficulties were never 
realised at home, from hrst to last the whole thing was treated as an 
adventure. That in the circumstances it must be condemned militarily, 
admits of no argument. Nor can there be any doubt that if its failure 
was due to half-hearted inception at the War Office, to unscientific 
handling, both military and naval, on the part of the Government, and 
finally to negligence to support the expedition once started — this latter 
the gravest of all mistakes in war — Mr. Nevinson 's account of its 
origins should be read carefully by all. Admiral Fisher disapproved — 
he was overruled. Lord Kitchener never liked it — he got dragged into 
it. It was Mr. Winston Churchill's scheme — he thought the flat 
trajectory of naval guns could demolish forts. And so on. It is now 
clear that General Sir Ian Hamilton was not to blame. He had no Staff 
instructions, and poor Staff help. He was never given the forces indis- 
pensable to success. He had to do what he could and certainly did so, 
the result being one of the greatest fights in the war and one of the 

Mr. Nevinson has certainly written an admirable account, both miUtary 
and literary. True criticism might easily point out that it is not strictly 
military enough to be authoritative, and perhaps too technical — the 
author has caught the soldier's habit of telling a story numerically, the 
tenth advanced, etc. — to be popular ; but the book is not journalism, it 
is a serious attempt to reconstruct the incidents of the campaign without 
bias. But there are omissions. Insufficient stress is laid on the failure 
to cope with the disease which really broke the expedition, and the levity 
with which the whole scheme was treated by the Government and the 
War Office at home. The only possible verdict is that if the adventure 
was worth doing it should have been conceived and carried out on the 
grand scale, which it never was. It will thus stand in our annals as one 
of our glorious and incomprehensible disasters, and Sir Ian Hamilton 
will certainly rank as one of our most unfortunate commanders. He 
might have won imperishable fame. He was never given the chance. 

Only Typewritten Manuscripts will be considered, and although every 
precaution is taken, the Proprietors xvill not be responsible for the loss or 
damage of the manuscripts that may be sent in for consideration; nor can 
they undertake to return manuscripts which are not accompanied by a stamped 
addressed envelope. 











TLbc Xonbon S. Xancasbire 

fire 3n6urance Company, XtD. 

Head Offices : 






*' We have much pleasure in renewing 
" our subscription to your Review, It 
** has been a great delight to us during 
" the past twelve months, and in spite 
"of war economies, we felt it to be 
"one of the necessities/' 

The above is one of many similar letters received 
from our Subscribers. 



Annual Subscription, Post Free to all parts of the World, 18/- 
Slx Months, ditto - - - - - - 9/- 


19, Qarrick Street, London, W.C. 2, 


Why you need 


after Influenza. 

Interesting Statement by a Physician 

(Formerly Lectarmr to Edinburgh Medical School) 

" Happening to have suffere J from a severe attack of 
influenza, and feeling an urgent need of tonic treatment, 
I resolved to give Sanatogen a fair trial . . . The results 
were all that could be desired. The general state of feeble- 
ness rapidly disappeared, and was replaced by a sense of 
returning vigour, unaccompanied by any subsequent 
depression. The appetite improved, and weight was 
gained rapidly . .. , 

"// is this personal experience of Sanatogen which leads me 
/(? recommend it so strongly. Its great merit is that its action 
is of a thoroughly natural kind. It docs not upset the 
system. Indeed, it is not to be regarded as a medicine, 
but rather as a valuable adjunct to our food, because it 
builds up and recuperates whilst it also acta as a safe 
restorative and tonic without involving any strain on the 
digestive organs. 

"In this respect, medical experience shows thzt from 
Sanatogen we gain, bulk for bulky more nutrition than from 
other foods, and that the body-building substance in it is more 
rapidly and completely absorbed into the system,'' 

Ask your chemist to-day for a 5/9 tin of Sanatogen ; he may be sold 
out, but will obtain it for you as quickly as possible. Be sure you get 
genuine Sanatogen, labelled: Genatosan, Ltd. (Britis'i Purchasers of 
.S\ 5^ The Sanatogen Co.), 12, Chenies Street, London, W.C. 1. 
(Chairman: The Viscountess Rhondda.)